What's New?


MicroscopeHigher Thought and Lower Motives Part 3





Science and MBTI®



The Personal Effect of Philosophy

Philosophy versus Science

Philosophy and MBTI®


The INFJ and the INFP

Philosophy and Buddhism

The Demise of Philosophy

Why Philosophy?

The Stillbirth of Science

S/N and Identity

A Brief Digression


A Balance of Power

Church versus State

State without Church


The Greeks and the Jews

The Birth of Science

The (Still)Birth of ?

The Next State and Church

‘God’ and the T/F Split


The INFP and Entertainment



Copyright © 2010, Lorin Friesen

*Myers-Briggs Type Indicator, Myers-Briggs, and MBTI are trademarks or registered trademarks of the MBTI Trust, Inc., in the United States and other countries.

Science and Philosophy

So far, our look at education and learning has focused upon various aspects of culture and revealed 'truth.' I would now like to turn our attention to two other types of thinking: science and philosophy. As we shall see, the material that we have covered so far, including the MBTI® categories, will play a major role in this discussion.


Let us begin by looking at science. Most of us take science for granted. When we do think about it, we probably picture technicians in white labcoats scurrying about from beaker to test tube in a room pulsating with mysterious energy and alien sounds, or perhaps we envision miniaturized electronic marvels streaming from myriads of robot-controlled assembly lines. However, this is not science, but rather technology. Science is neither a lab nor a factory, but rather a way of thinking.

What exactly is science? I suggest that it is a method of thought that contains the four essential elements of observationconclusionorder and prediction.[A] In addition, I suggest that science makes four fundamental assumptions about our natural environment.

The first ingredient of science is observation. Suppose that I pick up a rock, throw it over the edge of a cliff, and watch what happens. This is observation. It programs automatic Perceiver thought with facts. Each time that I watch another rock fall down, this incident is remembered as another fact within the storage shed of automatic Perceiver thought. Observation is most effective when my Perceiver storage shed receives many different types of examples.

Science contains the four essential elements of observation, conclusion, order and prediction.

Observation can be either passive or active. I may be the one doing the throwing, someone else may carry out the actions, or the stones may tumble down of their own accord. The important thing is not who does what, but rather how carefully I observe what is happening. This feeds Perceiver thought with accurate information that helps to build solid mental connections.

Observation leads naturally to conclusion. For instance, after dropping the 34th stone over the edge, I will probably come to the conclusion that any object that tries to ‘float in the air’ will end up ‘dropping like a stone.’ This brings us to the first assumption of science: It assumes that it is possible to make conclusions about the world based upon repeated observation. In other words, if the Perceiver storage shed decides that some fact is reasonable, then science feels justified in pulling this fact into the internal world of Perceiver thought as a belief. If I see enough rocks fall, then I will believethat all rocks that are thrown over the edge will fall. This means that the scientist is actually using observation to come up with a system of belief.

What does science observe? I suggest that science concentrates upon cause and effect. Normally, the scientist will not sit and stare at something that does nothing. It is the eastern mystic who practices navel gazing. Rather, science observes change, movement, process, and relationship. If anything does something, then science will probably observe it. If nothing happens, then science will likely move on to something more interesting. This leads us to the second assumption of science: It assumes that what is worth observing is change. In other words, science goes beyond the static and moves to the dynamic.[B]

I suggest that it is this focus upon process that distinguishes science from classification. Like science, classification also constructs a system of belief based upon careful observation. But, classification satisfies itself with cataloguing and filing. It operates libraries and museums.

As one examines the thinking of the ancient Greeks, one finds that they practiced classification, but never moved fully into science. Aristotle and his followers gathered plants and animals from all over the known world. The Greek city of Alexandria had an incredible library of manuscripts. However, with the exception of a few unusual figures such as Archimedes of Syracuse, Greek thinking was content to classify and to organize. Why did the Greeks discover classification and not science? I suggest that this happened because they did not accept the second assumption of science—namely, that what is worth observing is change. They thought that a man of learning first had to be a man of leisure. In their minds, manual labor was performed by slaves, women and other ‘inferior races.’ People who are physically static will also tend to think in terms that are static.

By the way, I suggest that we have just discovered the primary distinction between MBTI® and the theory of mental symmetry. MBTI®, on its part, is a method of classification. Like the Greek thinkers, it sorts humanity into static bins and declares that personal change is notpossible. In contrast, the theory of mental symmetry deals primarily with process. It looks at the path of personal growth and describes personal transformation. Why does MBTI® get stuck in classification? Because of the MBTI® S/N split. The Greeks separated action from thinking—that is, they emphasized the distinction between Sensing and iNtuition. Thus, they never discovered science. MBTI® does the same. Strangely enough, MBTI® can even be used to analyze its own inadequacies. However, it cannot claim to be a scientific theory, for if it is true, then science is impossible. But, read on…

Classification observes and categorizes static objects and experiences.

Science observes and categorizes dynamic change and process.

Let us return to our discussion about science. The conclusion that comes from observation leads to order. Science does not content itself with a system of belief. It also assumes that it is possible to summarize individual facts with a few general statements. In other words, it postulates that a general Teacher theory can be constructed which ties together Perceiver beliefs about the external world. For some reason, the scientist thinks that if he fills his internal Perceiver world with truth based in observation, then his Teacher strategy will be able to build order from the resulting mental complexity.

It was the triumph of this assumption that made Isaac Newton’s work so earthshaking. He was able to take observations made by astronomers and information gleaned from falling balls and swinging pendulums and summarize them with a few simple mathematical statements.[C]

This brings us to the final phase of science, which is prediction. So far in our discussion, science has used observation of dynamic change to construct a system of beliefs about the natural world and then it has organized these various beliefs into a general theory. In other words, it has gone from Mercy experience to Teacher theory. The scientist likes to confirm this research by making predictions about the world based upon his new-found understanding, thus completing the mental loop from Teacher thought back to Mercy experience. The atomic bomb, for instance, began its existence as a prediction. It verified Einstein’s famous equation that E=mc2, which states that matter (m) contains a stupendous amount of energy (E) locked within it, equal to its mass times the speed of light squared.

Scientists looked at this equation and deduced that a small amount of matter contained sufficient energy to generate a colossal explosion. Then they went further and actually believed that this prediction was accurate. So firm was their conviction that they convinced the American government to spend millions of dollars during the Second World War on the Manhattan project—guided only by the theorizing of a Teacher person with a poor sense of fashion and an even worse haircut. The end of this was an earthshattering kaboom, and the dawn of the nuclear age.

By the way, notice the contrast between the Mercy experiences that are created by science, on the one hand, and those generated by politics, on the other. Science starts with a ‘whimper’ and ends with a ‘bang.’ Einstein did not have personal charisma or political presence. However, his theory resulted in an experience that changed the course of history. In contrast, the ‘politician’ enters with a tailored suit, impeccable haircut, and polished multimedia presentation. Then he begins to curb the radicals and water down the proposals. Unlike science, the political process that he initiates begins with a ‘bang’ and ends with a ‘whimper.’

Four major assumptions of Science:

1.  Observation can lead to belief.

2.  Beliefs can be formed about relationships between cause and effect.

3.  Those beliefs can be formed into general theories.

4.  Those theories can be applied through Server actions.

Let us conclude. Science appears to make four huge assumptions about the external world. First, it assumes that it is possible to go beyond observation to Perceiver belief. Second, it assumes that there are solid Perceiver connections between natural cause and effect. Third, it assumes that these beliefs about the natural world can be described by a general Teacher theory. Finally, it assumes that this general Teacher theory can be applied with Server actions. If we didn’t know better, we might accuse the scientist of being a religious fanatic—a raving fundamentalist. Imagine making little ‘chicken scratches’ on pieces of paper and then expecting the world to conform to those calculations. Any other age would describe this sort of manipulation as the highest form of magic.[D]

Why do I belabor such seemingly trivial points? First, because science works! We are so accustomed to the technological benefits of scientific research that the major assumptions of science have become almost trivial to us. Isn’t it obvious that the natural world must operate in this way? To us it is obvious, but it certainly wasn’t evident to those who lived before the age of science. Just look at the story of Galileo, for instance, and you will see the struggle that was involved in getting from there to here.

Second, I emphasize these points because the theory of mental symmetry that we have developed makes exactly the same assumptions about the human mind that the scientist makes about the natural world. Like science, it also assumes that it is possible to come up with a set of rational beliefs based upon reasonable observations of human nature. It too believes that one should study mental change and reprogramming and disregard static elements such as culture and idolatry. It assumes that the resulting system of beliefs about human nature can be summarized by a general theory. Finally, it believes that applying this general understanding will change the world. If these assumptions operate so successfully within the realm of the objective, then why should they not also work when applied to the subjective?[E]

Third, I bring out these points because the scientific method, which we use to transform our world, corresponds perfectly with the process of personal transformation, which I have suggested can transform our minds.[F] Both begin by using Perceiver reasonableness to construct an internal world of Perceiver beliefs. Both study cause and effect—Perceiver connections which occur over time. Both go beyond Perceiver facts to general Teacher understanding. Both use this understanding to change Mercy identity. Finally, both integrate various modes of thought, and thus pursue mental wholeness.

This means that science is really a search for moral goodness.[G] Remember that we have defined that which leads to mental integration as morally ‘good,’ and that which causes mental conflict or disintegration as morally ‘evil.’ According to this definition, science is morally ‘good,’ because it builds an integrated, internal world of thought. Of course, science which remains purely objective will cloud this inherent goodness. That is because it emphasizes the mental split between objective and subjective—between T and F—and whatever causes internal division is, by definition, morally ‘evil.’ In addition, objectivescience causes people to question the traditional 'morality' of revealed 'truth' without providing an alternative—which is also bad. Does such an alternative exist? Yes. We have seen that scientific thought can be applied to the mind, and that the result is a system of morality.

But what about religion, culture, ‘God,’ and other supposedly non-scientific areas? Where would they fit within a scientific morality? By the end of the next book we will have addressed all of these issues.

Previously, we examined the personal pain and suffering that comes from building me upon a foundation of emotional 'facts.' The technology that surrounds us demonstrates some of the positive benefits of building me upon a foundation of rational truth. If our natural world has been improved so incredibly by general understanding based upon a belief in natural cause and effect that is rooted in observation of natural reality, maybe similar benefits could arise from building me upon a general understanding which is based upon a belief in mental cause and effect that is rooted in careful observation ofmental reality. In other words, maybe it is possible to expand science into a search for total moral ‘goodness.’

Is this the best ‘picture’ that I can give of my ‘new and improved’ world? Yes, it is. Remember that vision uses Perceiver strategy to relink existing Mercy memories. Since Perceiver thought looks for similarities and connections, all I can say is that the future could be like this, similar to that, or connectedin this way. That is one reason why the visionary person is so driven to realize his dreams. He knows that reality will be better than what he can imagine, and so he wants to realize his vision and live within it.

Science and MBTI®

We have examined the mental assumptions involved in science. Let us look now at how science relates to the four MBTI® divisions.[H] First, I suggest that the strength of modern science results from its integration of Sensing with iNtuition. In other words, science is successful because it bridges the S/N split.

Let us expand upon this thought. I have mentioned that science is rooted in observation. This means that it uses MBTI® Sensing to gain information about the external world. What does it observe? Change and process. This tells us that Serverthought, which carries out action and produces change, is involved in scientific analysis.

But, we also know that science is based heavily in mathematics. In other words, it reaches its conclusions by using a verbal form of mental processing that completely ignores sensation and the physical world. This tells us that science is also firmly entrenched within iNtuitive thought.

Science observes the Sensing world in order to prime iNtuition.

Science uses iNtuitive mathematics to explain the world of Sensing.

Finally, I have stated that science builds intellectual order. This again tells us that it goes beyond the world of Sensing and enters the iNtuitive realm of ideas and theories. And what does it do with these theories? It makes predictions. In the language of MBTI®, it uses iNtuition to go beyond the here-and-now to the realm of the possible. In other words, it applies iNtuitive possibility to the physical realm of Sensing. Thus, in science, Sensing leads to iNtuition and iNtuition returns to Sensing.

Notice the effect of integrating Sensing with iNtuition. Both are still very much active and alive. Science includes both the experimenter who focuses upon the world of Sensing and the theoretician who limits himself to the realm of iNtuition. But, there is a continual flow of information between the two. Science orders the realm of iNtuition while technology transforms the world of Sensing.

Now that we have described the strength of modern science, let us turn to its weakness. As I have mentioned before, today’s research is limited to the objective. Scientists do not allow their research to become tainted with personal feelings.[I] In MBTI® terms, science ignores Feeling and sticks with Thinking. Thus, while it may integrate S/N, it definitely keeps T and F widely apart.

This means that objective science and technology are the result of pursuing societal transformation to the exclusion of personal transformation. Societal transformation integrates S/N, while the absence of personal transformation keeps T/F apart. Thus, society as a whole becomes integrated, while individuals remain internally split. In practice, this means that most interaction between Sensing and iNtuition occurs externally. Most individual scientific workers continue to specialize in either research or development. Corporately, though, there are mechanisms in place to ensure that science and technology continue to interact with one another.[J]

I suggest that the limitations of objective science are all the result of its weakness and not due to its strength. When technology produces societal problems, the temptation is to subscribe to the Luddite mentality and to blame everything upon science. Nothing could be farther from the truth. Science promises to bring us better gadgets—only that—and it delivers upon this promise.

Objective science pursues social transformation while avoiding personal transformation.

The problem lies not in integrating S/N but rather in keeping T/F apart. If science expanded its thinking to include the subjective, then it would not deliver goods that destroyed humans. And, if we learned to apply a little rational thought to the subjective, then we wouldn’t be so foolish as to demand destructive applications from science.

So, what about P/J and I/E? Well, we know that these are secondary splits. Therefore, if ‘modern’ science ignores T/F, then obviously it cannot integrate MBTI® Perceiving and Judging. But, by integrating S/N, science and technology do make it possible for I and E to get together. As I mentioned earlier, the industrial revolution has joined S and N, whereas the computer revolution has bridged I and E. So why do I emphasize the need to integrate I with E when science and technology are already doing this? Read on…


Based upon the previous information, we can work out which particular one of the sixteen MBTI® types is most attracted to scientific thought. Notice that posing this question is somewhat of a contradiction. On the one hand, we have just seen that science as a system integrates Sensing and iNtuition. On the other hand, MBTI® asserts that it is impossible to integrate S and N. How can this paradox be resolved? By making a distinction between the person and the system. As I mentioned a few paragraphs back, science, as a whole, pulls Sensing and iNtuition together. However, individuals who work within science follow a division of labor in which some people emphasize Sensing whereas others exploit iNtuition. What keeps the structure together when the bricks are disjointed? The external benefits. A flow of information between science and technology allows us to continue producing new and improved tools and gadgets.

Let us expand upon this dichotomy between society and the individual. Earlier on, I suggested that, as individuals, we humans are only capable of tackling the T/F split. If we want to integrate S and N, then we have to get together and cooperate.[K]Therefore, dealing with only one of the two divisions of T/F and S/N will lead to an imbalance between corporate and individual. In fact, tackling S/N but not T/F will create two opposing forces. At the societal level, there will be a drive for integration. In contrast, the personal realm will continue to fly apart. Come to think of it, doesn’t this describe precisely the situation in our present world? Our corporate existence is coalescing into a single global economy through free market agreements and merger-mania. Simultaneously, our personal lives are fragmenting into special interest groups, ethnic independence movements and personal alienation.

Having said this, let us return to the scientist. What is his fundamental assumption? External dynamics and processes. He assumes that the external world contains sequences that are worth observing. Thus we conclude that his auxiliary must be either Extraverted iNtuition or Extraverted Sensing, for both iNtuition and Sensing deal with sequencing and process. Which of these two is it? Well, in order to discover the laws of nature, one must look for the order that lies behind the physical world. In other words, one must go beyond Sensing to iNtuition. Therefore, we conclude that the auxiliary of the scientist must be Extraverted iNtuition or EN.

That brings us to the dominant mode of thought. What does the scientist do with his iNtuitive data? He uses Perceiver logic to look internally for connections between sequences. When he sees similar processes at work in different situations, then he knows that he can form a mental hypothesis. For instance, suppose that I drop an apple and it falls to the ground. That is a sequence. Now suppose that I take your orange and drop it over the cliff. That also is a sequence. The scientist will observe both of these situations, notice the connection, stab his theoretical finger into the air, yell ‘Aha’ and pronounce: “Whenever you let go of an object, it heads in a downward direction.” Why does he come to this conclusion? Because his mind has a ‘living’ INTP network.[L]

The INTP emphasizes the mental circuit used in science.

·    The auxiliary of Extraverted iNtuition ‘reads the book’ of natural process.

·    The dominant of Introverted Thinking uses Perceiver logic to find similarities between processes.

We will look at the development of science, including the relationship between the scientific INTP and the INFP, whom you recall is the religious individual, more deeply later on. However, since we are discussing the INTP, let us see if we can work out a few more of his character traits—beginning with his mental foundation or auxiliary of Extraverted iNtuition. How does a person become an INTP? I have suggested that mental ‘life’ begins by assuming the auxiliary. The INTP has an auxiliary of Extraverted iNtuition. Thus, he assumes that he can suppress external Sensing and approach the external world with iNtuition.[M] But the INTP, like any normal human, lives in a sensory world. His five senses are continually filling his mind with data. How can he suppress this information? By focusing his mind upon words. How is this done? It happens naturally when a person, and especially a child, spends much of his time sitting and reading. On the one hand, he is physically passive. This limits external Sensing. On the other hand, a stream of words floods his mind, providing the raw material for iNtuition. Each story that the child reads opens his mind to new possibilities and soon he is mentally adept at performing the internal ‘leaps’ of iNtuition.[N] The INTP, however, still lives in a physical body. If he is ignoring it, then others must be taking care of it. Therefore, he is the intellectual, dependent upon others for his daily bread.

Based upon this foundation of Extraverted iNtuition, the INTP pursues his dominant mode of Introverted Thinking. Thinking emphasizes the Perceiver aspect of Perceiver/Mercy interaction. A dominant of Introverted Thinking therefore uses Perceiver logic to interpret words. But, logical analysis can only be used on words that make sense and that have specific meanings. Thus, the INTP abhors incoherence, for it fills auxiliary mode with verbal information that cannot be interpreted by dominant thought.

The INTP is skilled also at detecting verbal contradictions, for Perceiver thought that generates the dominant of Introverted Thinking is continually evaluating the words of others. Suppose that he hears or reads about some grand new theory. The Teacher words and ideas will easily enter his auxiliary mode of Extraverted iNtuition. The dominant mode of Introverted Thinking will then subject this new theory to an internal inquisition. If Perceiver strategy finds a contradiction, then the theory will collapse, producing Teacher pain that threatens the auxiliary mode of Extraverted iNtuition. Thus, when the INTP discovers verbal contradictions, he will feel driven to remove them from his environment.

Perceiver thought, however, is more than just a discrepancy detector. It also excels at discovering connections and similarities. This is both good and bad. On the one hand, this allows the INTP to discover the laws of nature. On the other hand, it makes the INTP prone to intellectual boredom. Whenever Perceiver strategy links a new idea to one already residing within the mind, subconscious Exhorter thought is reminded that the concept has been encountered before and it turns away in boredom.[O] The INTP then looks at the speaker and interjects, “You already said that. Don’t repeat yourself.”

Earlier on, we saw that Thinking creates its own imaginary Mercy experiences, and we looked at the example of money. The INTP lives in an internal world of Perceiver logic. Because he continually uses Perceiver logic, an imaginary, objective, personal identity will form within Mercy thought. It is an abstract form of me. This Mercy image will be supported by a logical Perceiver self-image. But, when the INTP uses logic, he pulls facts, including this self-image, into his internal Perceiver world—and this is a world of belief and of universal truth. Thus, the self-image of the INTP will become a standard by which all people are judged. Fellow researchers will be accepted as normal, while those who do not meet up to his own personal standard of logic will be dismissed as non-persons. Others will perceive this implicit rejection as intellectual snobbery. Meanwhile, the INTP assumes that his surrounding ‘sub-humans’ will continue to provide for his physical needs.

The INTP may be a snob, but he is usually also a successful one. It is his thinking pattern that discovers science. And science has transformed our entire world. When we, as products of this age, look back at the living conditions of our ancestors, we too regard them as almost subhuman. Thus, the judgments of the INTP’s self-image are accepted by us as accurate.[P] The only problem is that by suppressing feeling, the INTP as a person does not, and cannot, live up to his own self-image. Increasingly, he becomes locked in a world of objectivity, unable to apply his own truth to his own me, for the light that it generates is too bright for his subjective person to handle.

So, which cognitive styles tend to become INTPs? Well, one can conclude that Mercy and Exhorter people usually do not turn into INTPs, because they seldom pursue objective logic as a dominant mode of thought. In addition, we can rule out the Server person, because he is usually locked into Sensing. That leaves the Perceiver, Contributor, Teacher and Facilitator. All can develop INTP ‘life’ if they are fed with a diet of constant reading. The two styles most prone to turn into an INTP, however, are the Perceiver and Contributor, for both are conscious in Perceiver thought, the dominant mode of the INTP.


I have suggested that applying the scientific method to the subjective will lead to personal transformation. There is a branch of thinking, called philosophy, which does attempt to approach the subjective in a rational way. Does philosophyproduce personal transformation? Is it a productive mode of thought?

I suggest that the ultimate destination of philosophy is complete and utter intellectual failure. Why? Because it is hopelessly enmeshed in emotional 'truth.' But does all of philosophy have this emotional foundation? Doesn’t some philosophy use logic? After all, isn’t philosophy responsible for working out the rules of logic? We will address these questions in a moment. But first, let us look at the record of philosophy and see if it is consistent with a Perceiver foundation of emotionally based 'truth.'

Philosophy fails intellectually because it builds general understanding upon emotional 'truth.'

First, philosophy is generally recognized as a product of its age. In the Middle Ages, philosophy was considered to be the ‘handmaiden of religion.’ During the enlightenment, philosophy prided itself on its rational analysis, whereas during our age of info-glut, philosophy has become largely a technical analysis and a cataloguing of past philosophies.[Q] If a way of thinking depends upon its social environment for its ‘universal’ theories, then its 'facts' are obviously determined by the defining experiences of its culture. Science, in contrast, is relatively timeless. It stands on its own, apart from society.

Second, philosophy is a product of its philosophers. When we study philosophy, we also study the lives and personal experiences of the thinkers who came up with this understanding. If a general theory is so heavily influenced by the defining experiences of personal life, then this tells us that it uses 'facts' that are rooted in the Mercy emotions of me. Science, on the other hand, can be studied without any reference to the scientists who came up with these discoveries. It is a structure that exists apart from the opinions of people.

Third, philosophy is divided into various schools of thought. This demonstrates that its 'truth' is emotionally rooted in the opinions of important people: If Perceiver logic were followed, then divisions of thought would be eliminated as Perceiver thinking built connections between individual facts. However, if 'truth' is based upon the opinions of experts, then divisions stay, because Perceiver thought remains mesmerized and lacks sufficient confidence to build connections.

Fourth, philosophy ends up by destroying itself. It is fascinating to look at how Western philosophy has ‘progressed’ from Descartes to Sartre, or should I rather say regressed. Each philosopher started his theorizing with certain 'facts' which he 'knew' to be 'true.' The next philosopher then came along and wondered how his predecessor could be so stupid as to make an assumption which obviously was not 'true.' The result was that each philosopher 'knew' less and less, until finally we come to Jean-Paul Sartre of the twentieth century, who stated that nothing could be 'known.' When thinking is based upon a foundation of emotional 'facts,' then the more one thinks, the less one 'knows,' because thinking increases the emotional significance of me relative to the importance of my experts. If I become enough of an expert, then I will begin to question the 'facts' of my experts one after the other, as their 'truth' falls within the threshold of uncertainty, until finally, nothing is left.

Fifth, philosophy can never really be proven to be right or wrong. Scientific theories, in contrast, can be proved or disproved. This is a sign that Perceiver thought in science is capable of deciding what to believe and what not to believe. Philosophy, on the other hand, is never disproved, but rather goes out of fashion. Competing philosophical viewpoints are always contending with one another. Never are there any clear winners. This combination of strong 'belief' combined with an inability to determine belief suggests that Perceiver thought is being manipulated by some other source and is incapable of making its own decisions.[R]

Sixth, philosophers cannot even agree upon a proper definition of philosophy. Read a book about philosophy and it will generally start with the statement that the science of philosophy is hard to define. Whenever people have problems with definitions, this suggests that Perceiver strategy is in trouble, because it is Perceiver thought that is responsible for determining the meanings of words. Also, when each individual thinker comes up with his own set of definitions, this tells us that Perceiver thought is under the control of personal emotions. The terms of science, in contrast, are well defined, and everyone agrees upon these definitions. For instance, ask any scientist what is meant by work, energy, or entropy and he will give you essentially the same definition.

Seventh, philosophy is and appears to remain parasitic upon its culture. If you read the history of philosophy, you find that one philosopher after another concludes his grand theories with the statement: “All of my ideas are true, but we still live in a world of people who make emotional demands upon us. Therefore, the best approach is for us to ignore our ideas and to continue to obey the rules of society.” In other words, all of philosophy, and all of its high thought, is just so much hot air. Science gave birth to technology and technology has transformed our world. Philosophy, in contrast, gives birth to resignation; it remains at most an alternate reality within the mind of the philosopher.

Even when philosophy does get beyond approval, it seems to rebel from society, rather than set up a positive alternative. If philosophy responds to its society by ‘spitting it out whole’ instead of mentally breaking it up, ‘chewing’ on these various aspects and ‘digesting’ them, then this shows that it is primarily a system of understanding based—indirectly—upon its society and thus rooted in idolatry. It is not what it claims to be—a search for truth, and a hunger for universal answers.

Eighth, philosophy loses its brightest students. Back in the Middle Ages, all thinking was regarded as philosophy. Science did not exist in a separate form but was regarded as natural philosophy. However, since then, one discipline after another has left the realm of philosophy and struck out on its own. After each split, it seemed that philosophy was left with questions and doubts. If philosophy were based in Perceiver logic, then it could remain connected with its mental ‘children.’ However, if philosophy is rooted in emotional 'facts,' then we know that 'facts' cannot coexist with facts. Therefore, we would predict that whenever philosophy generated some form of rational thought, this thinking would have to leave the ‘cradle’ of philosophy in order to continue thinking rationally. When we look at the history of philosophy, we find that its ‘children’ have always rebelled and ‘left home.’

If you look back at these eight points, they can be summarized by the word failure. However, the story does not end there. The thinking of philosophy may be so much ‘hot air,’ but its harmful effects, in contrast, are very real and tangible.

The Personal Effect of Philosophy

The previous book described how a general Teacher theory can help me learn how to ‘fly’: It lifts me up, separates me from the ground, and propels me forward. A general theory of philosophy will also influence me, but I suggest that its effect will be exactly the opposite. Instead of lifting me up, it will hold me down. Rather than separating me from the ground, it will form an unbreakable bond between me and the earth. Finally, it also will generate an emotional force. But rather than propelling me forwards, this thrust will act like a giant rubber bandwhich does its best to bring me back to my original location.

Why does philosophy have these three effects? Let me describe the underlying reasons using the life of Sigmund Freud as an illustration. But wasn’t Freud a psychologist and not a philosopher? Yes and no. When psychology focuses upon self-analysis as in the case of Freud, then I suggest that it is easy to step over the line from psychology into philosophy.[S]

The first problem with philosophy is that it makes me feel good about my current state. As we saw in the first volume, whenever I come up with a general understanding, the result is positive Teacheremotion. Therefore, if I work out some overall explanation based upon a certain set of emotional 'facts,' then Teacher strategy will end up feeling good about those 'facts.' This positive Teacher emotion will make me want to stick with these 'facts.'[T] However, remember that emotional 'truth' is defined by isolated emotional experiences. Therefore, positive Teacher emotion will end up feeling good about the particular and very personal set of unique defining experiences that have happened to barge their way into my inner world of Mercy strategy. It is these incidental traumas and ecstasies that will determine the essence of my Teacher understanding, and its resulting emotion.

If we look at Freud, we find that much of his research was based upon a few critical childhood events, which always stood out in his memory. First, Freud remembered that he had felt evil thoughts against his younger brother when this brother was born and his mother no longer gave him exclusive attention. Second, he remembered feeling sexual arousal when he saw his mother naked. Third, he remembered deliberately urinating in his father’s bedroom, and his father responding by stating that Freud would never amount to anything. This incident, in particular, reverberated repeatedly within the dreams of Freud. Fourth, Freud remembered despising his father when he related how a gentile had knocked his fur cap into the gutter because he was a Jew and he had reacted by meekly picking up the cap.[U] This is not what we would call the most dignified—or general—foundation for a universal theory of human thought.

The second reason why philosophy ‘grounds’ us is that it makes Teacher theory dependent upon Mercy experiences and emotions. Philosophy tries to come up with Teacher understanding based upon the 'facts' which it 'knows' to be 'true.' But why are these 'facts' 'true'? Because a few defining experiences fooled Perceiver thought into 'believing' them to be 'true.' However, remember that Teacher strategy also thinks emotionally. Teacher thought itself uses Teacher feelings to decide which theories are more general than others. In philosophy, though, the 'facts' that are being used to build Teacher theories are inextricably linked to strong Mercy feelings. This means that the Teacher understanding of philosophy will inevitably be warped by Mercy emotions.

Let me give you an analogy. Suppose that Perceiver facts are like stones and that forming a Teacher theory is like building a wall out of stones. When 'facts' are determined by strong Mercy emotions, this plays visual tricks upon the ‘sight’ of Teacher thought, making it appear that the Perceiver stones are either bigger or smaller than their actual size. Therefore, if Teacher processing picks up a Perceiver stone that is associated with strong Mercy feelings, then Teacher thought will ‘feel’ that this stone is much larger than it actually is. In contrast, a large ‘stone’ with no accompanying Mercy emotions will end up ‘feeling’ rather small, in comparison to the other stones. You can imagine what the resulting Teacher wall would look like. The person doing the building will feel that his mental structure is perfectly straight and wonderfully constructed. However, a rational thinker who looks at the wall, or even someone with different defining experiences, will see a crazy quilt of gaps, crooked lines, and jutting rocks.

When we look at the research of Freud, we find that his emotional background did warp his theories. He was preoccupied with parent-child conflicts and with infantile sexuality. He tried to uncover hidden childhood traumas by using hypnosis, free association, and dream analysis. Finally, his professional relationship with others always seemed to involve either submission or domination. In other words, the strong Mercy emotion of his childhood traumas caused these mental ‘stones’ to be magnified far beyond their actual size. Most of Freud’s fellow ‘researchers,’ such as Adler and Jung, looked at the supposedly straight wall of understanding that Freud had constructed, and concluded that it was crooked and bent out of shape. In their analysis, the theory of Freud was warped.

Third, philosophy acts as a ‘rubber band’ that always brings me back to my original state. This is because my entire mind ends up being integrated around my defining experiences. First, my Mercy emotions are guided by the strong feelings of these events. Second, my Perceiver 'beliefs' are determined by these experiences. Third, my Teacher theories are also rooted in these same Mercy experiences. Teacher emotion now reinforces Mercy feelings. Therefore, any attempt to pull away from my foundation of idols will bring my entire mental structure crashing down around me. A person may be able to survive Mercy devastation if some compensating Teacher feeling can lift him up, but no one can handle simultaneous Mercy and Teacher trauma. That combination of bad emotion can only be described as a pit of black depression.[V]

Philosophy fails personally because its builds general understanding upon emotional 'truth.'

·    It makes a person feel good about his inadequacies.

·    It makes Teacher understanding dependent upon personal trauma.

·    It makes it impossible for a person to be transformed out of his present state.

A person who is that dependent upon his defining experiences for mental existence will obviously react strongly when these are questioned. This turns the mature[W] philosopher into a rabid defender of the status quo. Again, when we look at Freud, we find that he was incapable of changing his fundamental concepts. When members of his ‘Psychological Wednesday Circle,’ Freud’s research team, threatened to leave, Freud decided that in order for a person to remain a member, he had to accept “the existence of unconscious psychical processes, the theory of resistance and repression, and the appreciation of the part played by sexuality and the Oedipus complex.” In other words, in order to be a member of Freud’s inner circle, one had to accept as axiomatic the defining experiences of Freud’s childhood.

The response of Greek philosophy to the ‘success’ of Christianity during the third century AD provides a similar illustration. Until then, the Greek philosophers were basically religious skeptics who gave nodding approval to the pantheon of gods worshipped by the average Roman citizen. While as individuals they did not really accept these gods, as philosophers their general Teacher theories were based upon the prevailing 'beliefs' of the day.

Then along came Christianity, and suddenly society officially abandoned the old gods and began to worship the new Christian God. Did the Greek philosophers in Athens also forsake the old pagan gods? No, because unwittingly these philosophers had built their Teacher understanding upon the assumption of a 'belief' in these gods. Therefore, these ancient relics of Mercy emotion became stumbling stones that prevented the poor philosophers from conforming to the new standards of society. Now, the philosophers began to defend the existence of the old gods. However, they were no longer described as gods,but rather as demons who were trying to prevent philosophy from reaching its desired state of internal Teacher order based upon Mercy cultural absolutes. Why ‘demons’? Because the old 'beliefs' lived on as suppressed multiples within the minds of the Greek philosophers, and these mental ‘lifeforms’ now opposed the altered status quo of society, to which the philosopher as a creature of his age desired to adjust.

Philosophy versus Science

Whyis philosophy such a dismal failure? I suggest that it violates the four assumptions of science. First, science begins with a careful observation of the external world. This stops Mercy feelings from mesmerizing Perceiver strategy because it avoids the strong emotions of the subjective. It also helpsPerceiver thought to develop because it goes beyond the specific to the general: It studies many people, and many situations. It is this broad-based repetition that forms the basis for rational Perceiver thought.

Philosophy, in contrast, starts with the question: “What do I knowfor certain? What facts are true beyond a shadow of a doubt?” Not only does this cause the philosopher to search within himself for truth, rather than to examine the world around him, but it also brings the thinker directly to the very subjective biases that are so carefully avoided by the scientist. For instance, we are all familiar with the famous statement of René Descartes, “I think, therefore I am.” Descartes spoke these words because he was searching for something solid upon which to base his identity. Ultimately, he decided that the only thing that he could be certain of was his own subjective existence. Thus, he went to the very core of Mercy feelings, and chose to base his 'truth' upon the specific person of me.[X]

Let us look now at the second assumption of science. Why does science observe change? Because the external world is constantly in movement. The childish mind, in contrast, abhors disruption. It is held together by Mercy processing—which deals with static objects and experiences, and it preserves mental integration by surrounding itself with frozen, immovable idols. By focusing in a childish way upon the internal world, philosophy automatically violates the second assumption of science. Does it choose to do this? No. Rather, this is a byproduct of philosophy’s focus of study.

Third, there is the search for Teacherunderstanding. Because science avoids Mercy feelings, it is possible for Teacher emotion to step into the breach and to integrate isolated Perceiver facts of science. In contrast, the 'facts' of philosophy are already held together—by Mercy feelings. Thus, whenever Teacher strategy attempts to bring order to philosophy, the childish me steps in and demands that preservation of the status quo be given top priority.

Finally, science assumes that Teacher understanding can be applied. This is a natural conclusion, given the source of scientific truth. The facts of science came from an observation of the external world, therefore it makes sense that theories which come from these facts could be used to alter this same world. In contrast, the theories of philosophy are solidly rooted in Mercy feelings. This is why the philosopher inevitably concludes his pondering by a decision to follow the dictates of his society. He must, because these emotional absolutes provide the foundation for his thought.

The four assumptions of science are byproducts of its field of study.

·    The externalworld contains solid objects, therefore observing it develops Perceiver belief.

·    The external world moves and changes, therefore studying it teaches about process.

·    Objectivethought avoids Mercy feelings, therefore Teacher emotions fill the gap.

·    Science comes from the external world, therefore it is applied to the external world.

But what type of person could build such rigorous thought upon a basis of such erroneous assumptions? A person with the right cognitive style. Our study suggests that over 95% of philosophers throughout history have shared the cognitive style of Facilitator. The Facilitator ‘room’ acts as the observer of the mind, therefore the analysis of the Facilitator person will always be based upon assumptions, because he uses conscious thought to adjust and balance information that is provided by his subconscious mind. If it—his subconscious—knows, then he—the Facilitator—assumes.

But why have Facilitator persons done most of the thinking? Aren’t the other styles capable of rational thought? No, not when the mind is immersed in childishness. The Facilitator person may be incapable of questioning his assumptions, but he is alwaysable to describe them, regardless of his mental maturity. And, not only is the immature Facilitator person able to perform self-analysis, but he is also driven to do so. When the Facilitator lives in a time of societal upheaval, his subconscious mind becomes confused and this motivates him to search for answers. Meanwhile, the other cognitive styles hobble along in the semi-darkness, with just enough sanity to keep going, and just enough insanity to prevent them from accurately analyzing their predicament.

But doesn’t philosophy begin by questioning all assumptions? Yes, all axioms except the assumption of being a Facilitator person. The Facilitator philosopher assumes that he can remain in control of his mind—that conscious Facilitator thought by itself is sufficient to come up with an answer. But, Facilitator strategy is only one of seven mental modes; it operates in conjunction with the other six. Subconscious Perceiver strategy gives the Facilitator person his sense of knowing. Mercy mode contains the personal identity. Theories are developed by Teacher thought, and actions are guided by Server mode. If the Facilitator philosopher insists upon pretending that Facilitator strategy is the only valid form of thought, then, as we have seen, he will violate the four assumptions of science. On the other hand, if the Facilitator person recognizes that he has an autonomous cortex and that his subconscious mind has a right to exist, then the four assumptions fall into place: An operating Perceiver mode looks for solid facts; a reprogrammed Mercy identity accepts change; a functioning Teacher strategy develops general theories, and a developed Server mode applies these theories.[Y]

Historically, almost all philosophers have had the cognitive style of Facilitator

·    Whatever subconscious Perceiver and Server thought know, Facilitator strategy assumes.

·    The Facilitator assumes that, because he can see memories, he can understand thought.

Today, philosophy and science are treated as alternate paths to the goal of a general understanding. Go to the typical university, and you will find a department of science alongside a department of philosophy. Why? Not because science and philosophy share similar views. As we have seen, they are radically opposed to one another. Rather, I suggest that present day science, philosophy, and university are all expressions of Facilitatorthought. As I have mentioned, almost all philosophers have the cognitive style of Facilitator.[Z] As it turns out, the majority of famous scientists are also Facilitator persons. Therefore, the similarities between Facilitator thought and the university system, where these people do their work, turn out to be quite striking: The Facilitator stands apart from the mind and observes its activity; the typical university separates itself from normal society and studies it from a distance. The Facilitator analyzes but finds change difficult; universities study for the sake of learning,  while holding on to tenure.[AA] The Facilitator makes small, incremental changes and shies away from major shifts; the university system can digest gradual changes in knowledge but chokes when faced with a major breakthrough. The Facilitator is very aware of his senses; the university uses experiments to investigate the physical world. Finally, both the Facilitator and the university love statistics; they measure everything, and they keep written records of all their thoughts.[BB]

Let us close this section by looking at the big picture. History indicates, as we have shown, that science leads to measurable progress but philosophy does not. Science succeeds because it accepts four assumptions related to mental development. Philosophy fails because it rejects these same axioms. I suggest that the success of scientific thought is an indirect result of focusing upon the externalobjective world. Similarly, I suggest that the failure of philosophy is a byproduct of concentrating upon the internalsubjective world.

Many people have looked at this contrast and have instinctively concluded that sanity can only be discovered by turning away from the internal world and focusing upon external reality—exalting E over I. This is a correct conclusion, if one is comparing science with philosophy. The problem is that this solution itself takes the form of a mental split—between I and E.[CC]

Thus, it is essential to realize that the struggle between philosophy and science is not a conflict between internal and external but rather a struggle between irrational and rational. What really matters is how one treats the four simple styles. If Perceiver mode is taught solid facts and Mercy strategy is given meaningful experiences, if general theories are developed for Teacher thought and consistent sequences placed within Server memory, then thinking will be rational and successful, whether it is considered to be ‘scientific’ or not.[DD]

Looking at things even more broadly, I suggested in the previous book that a system of morality would only be successful if it included the two characteristics of time and generality. This statement, I suggest, summarizes the first three assumptions of science. Morality, which by definition is a search for mental integration, examines individual experiences to discover solid Perceiver connections—this is the first assumption of observation. A search for time adds the second aspect of making conclusions, and generality adds the third, which is discerning order. Applying all this—the fourth assumption—leads to life, the ultimate expression of personal success.

Speaking of internal life, I distinctly remember making a certain decision early on in my study of mental symmetry. I knew what it was like to exist in an environment in which my mode of thought—Perceiver strategy—was continually being attacked and suppressed. Therefore, when I discovered that my mind contained seven mental rooms, and that I was only conscious in one of them, I vowed that I would not treat subconscious thought in the same way that others had treated me. Instead, I decided that the seven mental strategies which existed in my mind all had a right to live. I would respect each one, and provide for its mental needs. In a sense, I mentally ‘signed’ an internal ‘bill of rights.’ This decision marked a turning point in my quest for mental maturity.

At first glance, an ‘internal pledge of respect’ may sound like the type of childish ‘secret oath’ that a group of boys meeting in a ‘treehouse club’ might concoct. However, I suggest that mental wholeness—the ultimate goal of personal transformation—will never be reached unless one takes precisely this step. This is because the basic desire of every mental ‘lifeform’ is to stay alive. If this fundamental need for mental survival is not met, how can internal harmony be achieved?

Objective science is successful because it makes the right assumptions.

·    In order to study the internal subjective, these assumptions must be made explicit.

·    This occurs only when subconscious modes are given the right to live and be free.

This vow, I suggest, describes the essence of what separates science from philosophy. The scientist respects his external world. He accepts the existence of the physical world with its objects, natural processes, and laws of nature, and devotes himself to a study of this structure. In contrast, the Facilitator philosopher does not respect his subconscious inner world.[EE] He remains firmly in charge of his mind and forces conscious will upon subconscious thought. Thus, I suggest that if philosophy is ever to succeed in comprehending the mind, then it must—irrevocably—give subconscious thought the right to exist.[FF]

But why can’t a person can’t a person simply decide to apply the four assumptions of science to his internal world? Why is it necessary to go through the formal—and seemingly childish—step of ‘signing an internal bill of rights’ with subconscious thought? Because only subconscious processing is capable of adequately analyzing subconscious information. Suppose that I am a Perceiver person and that I choose to respect internal sequence. The problem is that I am using Perceiver thought to decide what is or is not a valid sequence. But, Perceiver strategy is designedto analyze objects, not sequences. When it comes to sequences, Server thought is the natural expert. In addition, only subconscious Server strategy has access to the ‘toolbox’ of sequential information stored withinautomatic Server thought. Therefore, if I as a Perceiver person use conscious thought to respect Server sequences, then I will continually be forcing conclusions upon subconscious Server thought that are based in inferior processing and inadequate data. And no one likes to be controlled by a know-it-all boss who is dumb and ignorant.

But why must this internal ‘bill of rights’ be couched in personal terms? Because subconscious thought will only operate if it is mentally alive, and once it lives it expects to be treated as something that is alive.

But surely giving freedom to subconscious strategies means being flooded by irrational thoughts and losing control of my mind, doesn’t it? Not necessarily. If I feed my subconscious a diet of insanity, then obviously it can only produce insanity. Garbage in, garbage out. But, if I fill my subconscious with healthy thoughts and images,[GG] then subconscious strategy will operate sanely. After all, if a Server person, for instance,can appear to be a ‘normal human being,’ then it makes sense that subconscious Server thought can also act ‘normal’—if it is developed properly.

Finally, I suggest that the way that I treat my subconscious modes establishes a set of internal Perceiver and Server guidelines that determine how subconscious thought will treats me—the person who has conscious control of my mind. If I give respect to subconscious thought, then it will respond by respecting conscious thought. If I destroy my subconscious, then it will in turn attempt to destroy conscious control. choose the type of government that will rule my mind. My decisions ultimately determine whether my mind becomes a democracy, theocracy, or dictatorship. And, my mind is the one world that I cannot escape. It follows me wherever I go and whatever I do.

Philosophy and MBTI®

We have taken a brief look at the mindset behind philosophy. Let us see now if we can work out which of the sixteen specific MBTI® types practices philosophy. This means deciphering the dominant mode of thought along with the auxiliary. That should not be too difficult, because we already know that a philosopher passes through two different stages. First, he works out what he knows. Then, he uses these mental ‘bricks’ to build his philosophy. Thus, we would expect his auxiliary to be associated with knowing and his dominant with philosophizing.

Let us begin with the dominant mode of thought. What does the philosopher do? He thinks; he meditates; he finds emotional satisfaction in contemplating internal worlds of grandeur. In other words, he uses Introverted iNtuition. Why Introverted? Because philosophy is a mental pursuit. The philosopher is not trying to change his world. He seeks only to understand it. Why iNtuition? Because he ignores the here-and-now of Sensing and addresses big questions such as “What is the meaning of Life?” or “How did it all begin?” or “Who or what is God?” He leaps from one grand statement to another and then expounds upon each in esoteric tomes that flow endlessly from his fluid pen.[HH]

If the dominant mode is Introverted iNtuition, then MBTI® theory tells us that the auxiliary or assumption must be either Extraverted Thinking or Extraverted Feeling. We can figure out which one of these two applies by examining the bottom line of the philosopher. If he is forced to pick between Perceiver logic and Mercy feelings, which one does he choose? As we saw above, the history of philosophy indicates that Mercy emotions provide his final source of 'knowing.' Ultimately, the philosopher is a product of his age who follows Mercy-based culture rather than Perceiver mediated logic. And, philosophy splits into competing schools of thought; it does not look for Perceiver connections between rival theories. Thus we conclude that philosophy is built upon an assumption of Extraverted Feeling. A combination of dominant Introverted iNtuition and auxiliary Extraverted Feeling means that the philosopher uses INFJ processing.

The philosopher uses INFJ processing.

·    His auxiliary is Extraverted Feeling—the source of his emotional 'truth.'

·    His dominant is Introverted iNtuition. He builds an internal understanding.

But, didn’t I say previously that the philosopher looks inside of himself for 'knowing'? Here I am suggesting that he is rooted in an external world of Feeling. Exactly. What is the mechanism for emotional 'knowing'? Some external, emotional Mercy situation comes along and mesmerizes Perceiver thought into 'knowing' what is 'true.'[II] Therefore, the philosopher thinks that he is searching for internal 'knowing' but he is really cataloguing his emotional defining experiences—all of which were imposed upon his mind by external situations and by other people. We see this illustrated in the life of Sigmund Freud. His childhood traumas provided the ultimate basis for his psychological research. We should not be surprised that philosophers confuse external with internal, because most are Facilitatorpersons. As the ‘secretary of the mind,’ this cognitive style is mentally blind to the source of his 'knowing.'

Wait. If philosophy is rooted in Mercy feelings, then how can it be the historical source of logical thought? I suggest that philosophy leads, temporarily, to Perceiver logic. We can see this by examining history. Rules of logic were developed by Greek philosophers such as Socrates and Plato. However, this rational thinking lasted only two or three generations before it was submerged again by the surrounding culture. Similarly, modern philosophers, such as Descartes, were masters of logical thought. But, a few centuries later, Kant rejected logic in favor of thesis-antithesis-synthesis. In fact, if a field of thought ever does become permanently rooted in logic, it is forced to leave philosophy and become another branch of science.

Let me illustrate this by outlining the typical history of philosophy—both for an individual and for society as a whole. First, philosophical thought is triggered by a breakdown in societal values. When this occurs, people and institutions which used to command respect crumble and lose their status. This leads to a major shift in the external world of Mercy feelings. As we will see later, the Facilitator person always tries to make the best of the existing situation. Thus, if his moral authorities are failing, he will search for better and more stable emotional pillars. The mental result of this soul-searching is a pile of solid, internal Perceiver bricks. They may be formed largely from the ‘ice’ of frozen experience, but they are nevertheless solid—for the time being. This Mercy success presents the Facilitator philosopher with a Teacher crisis. He may have stable building material, but it is disconnected, and that makes Teacher thought feel bad. The Facilitator thinker then turns from his auxiliary mode of MBTI® Extraverted Feeling to his dominant mode of Introverted iNtuition, in order to do something about his muddled and melancholic state. It is this transition that produces the philosopher.

Philosophy begins with an external Mercy crisis.

·    The Facilitator determines which facts he either 'knows' or knows to be true.

Building solid facts creates an internal Teacher crisis.

·    The Facilitator integrates his facts to build a general Teacher understanding.

We can now understand why Perceiver logic is a temporary product of philosophy. When the philosopher is in his searching phase, he is testing many different Perceiver memories for stability. This provides both the opportunity and the possibility for Perceiver thought to develop. Opportunity comes because subconscious Perceiver thought in the Facilitator philosopher learns how to compare one situation with another. Possibility arises because the Facilitator is searching through memories that have inadequate Mercy feelings, and subconscious Perceiver strategy is therefore able to wake up from its mesmerized state and begin to think.

Why doesn’t this logical thinking last? Because, by thinking, the Facilitator philosopher becomes the source of his own 'truth.' Ultimately, as he builds the results of his self-examination into a universal theory of understanding, he becomes his own ‘god’ who 'knows' that he is infallible. A high and lofty person such as this is no longer subject to the restrictions of logic.


Our look at the connection between philosophy and the INFJ has probably raised more questions then it has answered. Unfortunately, that is the problem when one pursues a topic using two different schemes. Each time more detail is added to one theory, it introduces questions about the other. Thus one is forced continually to introduce topics that will only be discussed in detail later on.

Since we are currently talking about MBTI®, let us push forward by looking at more traits of the INFJ, starting with the obvious and ending with the controversial.[JJ]

First, the INFJ makes an excellent personal therapist. This is because there is a natural connection between philosophy and psychology. The philosopher analyzes himself. The psychologist analyzes others. Both are motivated by emotional trauma. Both mine the swamps of emotional memories for solid ground. Both work out theories to explain what they find, and both are better at labeling and categorizing than they are at solving or changing. Finally, our research suggests that many psychologists, like most philosophers, have the cognitive style of Facilitator.[KK]

The personal therapist begins by focusing upon the emotional hurts of his patient. This uses the INFJ’s auxiliary mode of Extraverted Feeling. He then uses his dominant mode of Introverted iNtuition to come up with a theoretical explanation for these problems. This is exactly the same process that the philosopher uses to study himself.[LL]

There is, however, a critical distinction between philosophy and psychology. The philosopher who examines his own person has a clientele of one. Whenever Perceiver facts are based upon isolated Mercy examples, as they are in his case, Mercy thought tends to win out over Perceiver logic.[MM] In contrast, the psychologist diagnoses many individuals; he does not restrict his analysis to one person. Therefore, Perceiver thought and logic is much more prone to develop in the psychologist than it is in the philosopher. In addition, the psychologist is studying the feelings of someone else, whereas the philosopher is digging into his own emotional mire. This puts the logical thinking of the psychologist under less emotional pressure. The end result is that psychology usually contains more and longer-lasting logic than does philosophy, even though both use the same mode of thought.

Our analysis implies that the thinking of the philosopher and the psychologist is determined completely by their respective environments. To a certain extent this is true.[NN] The Facilitator person literally watches and mediates from the sidelines as his subconscious mind is programmed by his environment. While he is aware of most memories, he simply cannot see the detailed mental processing that builds up the structure of his subconscious thought.[OO] Thus, mental processing in him really does operate autonomously.

The Facilitator person sees subconscious memories but is blind to subconscious processing.

One may wonder how the Facilitator can mix rational facts with emotional 'truth' when MBTI® states that Thinking and Feeling cannot be combined. The answer is again found within the mental structure of the Facilitator person. As the ‘secretary’ of the mind, he notices the present situation and adjusts the mental flow of information in order to solve the immediate problem. Thus, if the current context contains rational thinking, he will use conscious thought to facilitate the use of Perceiver logic. Similarly, if Perceiver thought is mesmerized within the present context, he will adjust mental flow in order to ensure that Perceiver strategy remains 'frozen.' If facts and 'facts' do come into contact with one another, Facilitator mode will notice the impending crisis of knowing and respond by toning down the ‘offending’ information and separating the potential mental combatants.[PP] Thus, the Facilitator person, more than anyone else, is a master at compartmentalization.[QQ] It is normal for Perceiver logic to develop in some parts of his mind while at the same time Perceiver strategy remains completely mesmerized in other areas.

Once subconscious Teacher strategy within the Facilitator philosopher develops a general theory to explain his particular mental combination of rock and 'ice,' the Facilitator person becomes driven to preserve Teacher emotion by keeping this mixture intact. If a shift in knowledge attacks this Teacher understanding, the Facilitator person instinctively responds by adjusting the flow of information in order to remove this threat.[RR] As usual, he uses mixing and compartmentalization to make the best of the existing situation.[SS]

Let us turn to the next point. The INFJ is naturally talented at creative writing. Again we notice the Mercy to Teacher connection. Fictional writing uses emotional Mercy experiences to inspire an iNtuitive flood of Teacher words. What is the source of these experiences? Emotional encounters with the external world of personal pain and pleasure. Once more, we see the auxiliary of Extraverted Feeling. What is the product of the iNtuitive thought? An internal realm, peopled with imaginary citizens and concepts, described through words. This is consistent with a dominant of Introverted iNtuition.

But what does creative writing have to do with philosophy? Everything. I suggest that fiction is the poor man’s philosophy. Why do we read fiction? Because it touches our emotions; it appeals to our fears, our hurts, our hopes, our dreams, and our loves. It uses words, then, to cloak these Mercy experiences with some sort of rationale that can give integrated meaning to our fragmented existence.[TT]

Fiction is the poor man’s philosophy.

Moving on, the INFJ often has a vivid imagination and can appear ‘mystical’ to others. Now we are beginning to tread on shaky ground, for mysticism does not sit well with the modern, objective, scientific mindset. But didn’t I just suggest that philosophy leads to temporary logic? Right now, most philosophy is logical, because we live in a technological world. Logic forms the basis for our Western society, and philosophy is always a product of its age. Thus, philosophy currently looks down its collective nose at mystical thought. This, however, is beginning to change. Our culture is becoming less logical and more mystical. And, as our society adjusts, so do the philosophers. We will examine this process in a few pages.

So what is mysticism and how does it relate to the INFJ? In essence, mysticism says that something lies behind the physical world and that the relationship between the sensory world and this ‘something’ is irrational and emotional. These beliefs are a natural byproduct of INFJ processing. It begins with Extraverted Feeling that inhales emotional experiences directly from the external world. This emotional identification allows the mind to ignore the external structure from which these experiences came. The INFJ then jumps to Introverted iNtuition, which ties emotional memories together to form an internal structure. That is, the INFJ goes directly from emotional Mercy experience to general Teacher theory, skipping any intervening steps. This, I suggest, is the mental basis for mysticism. It lives in a world of blended Mercy and Teacher feelings. It identifies with the Mercy emotions of human existence and superimposes upon this a grid of confabulated Teacher order. It is this direct jump from Mercy to Teacher that produces the irrationalism. Rational thinking uses Perceiver facts and Server sequences to build a comprehensive Teacher understanding of Mercy situations. It goes from Mercy to Teacher, but not directly. Summarizing in one statement, it is the elimination of Perceiver and Server confidence that distinguishes mysticism from rational understanding.

So, why does the INFJ follow mysticism? Because of the S/N and T/F splits. T/F says that living in subjective feelings means throwing logic out of the window. Similarly S/N states that Teacher-guided iNtuition ignores Sensing and its associated Server sequences.

It is the limited ‘life’ of the MBTI® categories that leads to mysticism. Remember that MBTI® describes the minimal requirements for mental existence. It connects one external mode of thought with one internal aspect. But, we know that mental life requires the cooperation offour mental modes. Thus, if one wants to achieve true ‘life’—the substance of which mysticism is a shadow—one must integrate four strategies: Mercy, Perceiver, Server and Teacher. How does one get beyond the limited ‘life’ described by MBTI®? Through personal transformation. And, if each stage of transformation adds one extra element of ‘life,’ then we can conclude that true ‘life’ will only be found if one is willing to go through personal transformation twice.[UU] Ouch! Double Ouch!!

Let me explain further by referring to the diagram of mental symmetry. ‘Life’ needs T + S + P + M. Notice how these are connected. M connects to P which goes through C to S which connects to T. These links are all precise ones that build solid content. Put these four together and you get true ‘life.’ How is ‘life’ expressed? Through the fuzzy connection that links Mercy and Teacher via the Exhorter.[VV] This link has all of the characteristics of ‘life’: it is unpredictable, it involves emotion, it connects experiential memory with intelligence, and it generates imagination, energy, and motivation.

The INFJ takes a shortcut to mental ‘life’ by going directly from Mercy to Teacher, ignoring the two intervening steps. In other words, he overlooks the precise connections of T + S + P + M and focuses upon the fuzzy bridge of T + M. How can he do this? By building upon an assumed structure of Server and Perceiver content. First, he learns Server sequences by living within a physical body. He may attempt to ignore this body, but moving it around does program Server strategy. Second, he learns Perceiver logic through comparing emotional Mercy experiences.


Notice how this shortcut to ‘life’ relates to the two stages of philosophy. The goal of the first stage is to achieve mental clarity. Anyone who finds himself immersed in a ‘soup’ of undigested emotional experiences will want to make sense of his surroundings. This desire is especially true of the Facilitator person, because, as we shall see later, Facilitator strategy cannot operate when the mind is confused. Therefore, the budding philosopher will be driven to sort through his emotional memories in order to organize them and classify them. As a mental byproduct, this mental sorting will develop Perceiver thought. In addition, as I have just mentioned, living as a normal human in the natural world will program Server strategy. Thus, the Perceiver and Server content that is needed to support truncated INFJ mental ‘life’ develops as a byproduct of Extraverted Feeling.

The jump from Extraverted Feeling to Introverted iNtuition occurs when the emerging philosopher discovers Teacher thought and Teacher emotion. In the Facilitator person, this transition occurs automatically as subconscious Teacher strategy finds a way of tying together the Perceiver facts that were discovered during the first stage. The mental goal now changes from clarity to illumination. The philosopher no longer feels driven to organize his Mercy experiences into separate Perceiver ‘piles.’ Instead, Teacher emotion now motivates him to integrate these ‘piles’ into a general structure. Unfortunately, his mental ‘piles’ will often refuse to fit together. Why? Because his initial goal was not to follow sequence or discover logic but rather to achieve clarity. Thus, his emotional experiences may be neatly sorted, but they are not analyzed or digested. And how will the philosopher respond when he cannot achieve mental integration? He will twist his facts and warp his sequences in order to make them fit together. Why? Because his goal is not understanding but illumination. This twisting occurs naturally as the philosopher becomes his own expert—gaining the emotional importance needed to redefine 'truth'—and as he begins writing—allowing him to use Teacher words to adjust the Server structure that his mind gained from physical action.

The budding philosopher searches for clarity, not Perceiver truth.

The growing philosopher looks for illumination, not Teacher understanding.

Eventually, the INFJ will be able to achieve his desired goal of mysticism—namely, to luxuriate in the emotional currents of a direct Mercy-Teacher connection. While he is searching and building, Perceiver facts and rational thinking prevent him from tying together Mercy and Teacher feelings. But, as the scaffolding of Perceiver logic and Server skill fades, the INFJ is finally able to break through the barriers of Perceiver and Server content and emerge into the emotional illumination of true mysticism. Even though Perceiver and Server processing are now suppressed, Perceiver and Server memories remain to provide a mental structure that can tie Mercy and Teacher thought together. Thus, the ‘mature’ mystic claims that his discoveries are beyond logic and reach past the physical body. In a sense, he is right, because he had to pass through logic and action in order to reach his mystical epiphany. But, by mentally suppressing the structure needed to support his mysticism, he also guarantees that he will never achieve more than a passing glimpse of true ‘life.’

This direct connection from emotional Mercy experiences to Teacher words can be verbally encouraged. Whenever a person speaks, he is expressing internal Teacher thought—the dominant of the INFJ. If the INFJ adds a non-verbal component to his speech, this will trigger his auxiliary of Feeling. If the speech is meaningless, then Perceiver strategy will not become involved. Similarly, Server thought can be suppressed by saying syllables that lack structure and grammar. Thus, the ‘oooooommm’ of the Eastern mystic or the ‘tongues’ of the religious charismatic are excellent tools for encouraging a mystical mindset.

Let us move on to the next INFJ trait, which I will allow Keirsey to describe. He says that “INFJs can intuit good and evil in others, although they seldom can tell how they came to know. Subsequent events tend to bear them out, however.” This trait definitely goes ‘beyond logic and past the physical body.’ But, it can nevertheless be analyzed and understood. Earlier on, I suggested that emotional 'truth' divides the world into ‘us versus them’ or ‘good and evil.’ This is because Perceiver 'facts' are being defined by strong Mercy feelings. If these feelings are positive, then the corresponding 'facts' are accepted as ‘good.’ In contrast, negative emotions will create 'facts' which are labeled ‘evil.’ Thus, for the individual who 'believes' in emotional 'truth,' the struggle is not to determine truth, but rather to replace evil 'truth' with good 'truth.' This becomes a fundamental aspect of INFJ thought.

The INFJ’s dominant mode of Introverted iNtuition takes this three steps further, all the way to mental ‘life’—which again turns out to be a shadow of the real thing. Skipping over Perceiver and Server thought, iNtuition looks for a general Teacher understanding that can explain the Mercy experiences of Extraverted Feeling. Thus, evil 'facts' will grow to become an imaginary ‘living’ person who is responsible for this ‘heresy.’ Likewise, good 'facts' will be viewed as part of a good person.[WW]

Notice that the INFJ combines two unrelated concepts. First, he goes beyond individual experiences and words to a mystical kind of mental ‘life.’ This idea is consistent with mental wholeness, for ‘life’ does emerge whenever Teacher, Server, Perceiver and Mercy memories are connected. Second, the INFJ divides this life into good and evil. This concept is not consistent with mental wholeness. Instead, it is rooted in emotional 'truth.' When true mental life emerges—after complete personal transformation—then the concept of good and evil is no longer present. Instead, it is replaced by completeness and incompleteness, wholeness and fragmentation.[XX]

This brings us to our final and most controversial point. Keirsey states, “If a person demonstrates an ability to understand psychic phenomenon better than most others, this person is apt to be an INFJ.” Is there such a thing as a ‘psychic phenomenon’? I would rather not answer that point. However, if we look at the mental behavior of those who claim to have psychic or spiritual powers, I would suggest that we can make three major statements.

First, whenever people or groups utilize the direct emotional connection between Teacher and Mercy thought, then they will claim to exhibit psychic traits. Four MBTI® types happen to fall into this category: the INFJ, INFP, ENFJ and ENFP. The last two types describe most Exhorter persons, who are conscious in the mode which bridges Teacher and Mercy thought.

Second, the specific MBTI® type will determine the form of ‘psychic’ power being claimed. The INFJ assumes that a hidden Teacher world lies behind visible Mercy experiences. Thus, he will usually claim to ‘receive messages’ from beyond. The Exhorter person, in contrast, goes from the internal to the external. Therefore, his ‘psychic’ ability usually manifests itself as a form of special influence or healing ‘power.’[YY]

Third, the stability or duration of any ‘psychic’ event or ability depends upon the durability of the Perceiver and Server memories that relate Teacher and Mercy thought. If their content is unreliable, then the ‘spiritual’ connection quickly fades. On the other hand, content that is solid can support a much longer and greater ‘psychic’ episode.

‘Spiritual’ activity requires direct interaction between Mercy and Teacher modes.

·    If this interaction ignores Perceiver and Server content, the activity will be irrational.

·    A ‘spiritual’ connection only lasts as long as it has underlying Perceiver and Server content.

Obviously, a lot more can be said about the subject. However, I suggest that these principles are sufficiently general to cover every psychic event, all spiritual activity, and every religion.[ZZ]

But is philosophy religious? Yes, very much so. In the intermediate stages, when it uses logic and accepts the physical body, it may attempt to deny religion, spirituality, and psychic ability. However, if you examine the history of philosophy, you will find that eventually it turns its back upon logic, denies the physical body and the physical world, and fully embraces Eastern Buddhist-like religion, along with the various overt spiritual and psychic overtones. And, because philosophy struggles so hard in its earlier stages to pursue logic and to comprehend the natural world, the mysticism it achieves in its finalstages is sometimes sufficient to launch a full-fledged religion—which usually turns out to be some variation on the Buddhist theme.

The INFJ and the INFP

I suggested previously that the INFP’s combination of mental modes naturally produced a 'belief' in a rational, external, comprehensible Deity. Now we see that the INFJ also has religious aspirations, but the image of ‘God’ which forms is quite different.

Why are these two modes ‘religious’? Because they both use Feeling and iNtuition. This combination produces general Teacher understanding and causes these theories to be interpreted in a personal way.

If we compare the ‘God’ of philosophy and Buddhism to the ‘God’ of revealed 'truth,' though, we notice that they are very different ‘creatures.’ I suggest that these contrasts are natural consequences of the mode of thought that is being used.

First, revealed 'truth' teaches that ‘God’ rules over the external universe. Why? Because it is based in Extraverted iNtuition. Since Teacher theories have their source in external words, ‘God’ is also 'believed' to reside in the external world. In contrast, Buddhism teaches that ‘God is within.’ This is because the INFJ lives in a dominant of Introverted iNtuition.

Second, revealed 'truth' generally begins by asserting that there is a ‘God.’ It then states that this  ‘God’ can be known personally. Finally, it adds doctrine and understanding to this internal subjective experience. I suggest that this process reflects the growth of the MBTI® modes. Development of thought begins with the auxiliary of Extraverted iNtuition. Because this is Teacher-based, there is an immediate emphasis upon ‘God.’ This external foundation leads to the dominant of Introverted Feeling. In other words, the external ‘God,’ who is pre-existing, wants to have a personal connection with the internal subjective and wants to live with me. Finally, a stage occurs that goes beyond the two steps of MBTI®: Teacher strategy notices what is happening in Mercy strategy and develops theories to explain this internal effect.[AAA] Because the Mercy feelings are associated to some degree with Perceiver logic—which develops from reading the Holy Book—the Teacher theories also include some rational thinking. The result is religious doctrine.

In Buddhism, the discovery of ‘God’ comes later. The INFJ has an auxiliary of Extraverted Feeling. Therefore, his philosophy begins with a self-analysis of the childish me—defined by emotional experiences that came in from the environment. Only when the dominant mode of Introverted iNtuition emerges does the philosopher begin to talk about ‘God.’ And who is the source of this ‘God’? Me. Why? Because the INFJ builds Introverted iNtuition upon Extraverted Feeling. Thus, the INFJ asserts that ‘God’ comes from me. What type of me? A me which identifies with emotional experiences in the external world. Therefore, he believes that the ‘God’ who is in me is also ‘a part of everything.’ As with the INFP, there is often a third stage. In this case, Mercy strategy notices the emotional impact of the general Teacher theory of the ‘all is one God’ and interprets it in personal terms. The result is an ecstasy, in which Mercy strategy luxuriates in being ‘friends’ with the ‘God’ whose source was me.

In a third contrast, the ‘Gods’ of INFP and INFJ react quite differently to the application of Perceiver logic. On the one hand, the INFP with his external book must use Perceiver logic to build his original Teacher understanding, for he must comprehend the words of his book. Therefore, his ‘God’ is inherently a rational one, with irrational overtones. On the other hand, the INFJ philosopher has produced his universal Teacher theory of ‘Oneness’ by denying all logic. Therefore, his ‘God’ is basically irrational.

Finally, both of these ‘Gods’ have a paradoxical view of conscience, though in different ways. On the one hand, the INFP ‘God’ preaches conscience. This is because reading uses Perceiver meaning to impose images upon Mercy strategy, and conscience develops whenever solid Perceiver 'facts'[BBB] touch emotional Mercy experiences. The application of this conscience, though, is less consistent. Why? Because the dominant aspect of INFP thought goes ‘beyond’ Perceiver meaning to Introverted Feeling, and this mode of thought treats logic as an option, and not as a necessity. Thus, INFP religion begins by stating that ‘God’ has solid rules which apply to everyone, and then it turns around and suggests that these harsh restrictions can be bypassed through a personal connection with ‘God.’ Notice the logic. Extraverted iNtuition uses Perceiver meaning to build images in Mercy strategy. This creates the strong rules. Then, Introverted Feeling uses emotion to interact with the image of ‘God’ that is formed. This produces the personal exception.

The approach of the Buddhist INFJ ‘God,’ in contrast, is exactly the opposite. Initially, the whole concept of ‘God’ is called into question. This is because the Facilitator will only enter into the path of philosophy when his society is falling apart. Obviously, a path that is triggered by shaky ‘gods’ will not have strong faith in any one ‘God.’ In addition, the endless self-analyzing of the philosopher tends to exalt his opinion of his own self, and this confirms him as a skeptic of all established forms of 'knowing.'

The resulting hodge-podge of facts and 'facts' fragments the mind of the philosopher, driving him to search for Teacher integration. This he achieves by denying logic.[CCC] This denial expresses itself as an antipathy towards any form of rules or conscience.

INFP processing 'believes' in an external God of truth.

·    It feels that this ‘God’ wants to know me personally.

INFJ thought begins with personal 'knowing.'

·    It then feels that me is the source of an internally based ‘God.’

This free-thinking agnosticism lasts until the third stage when the general Teacher theory of ‘Oneness’ begins to touch Mercy strategy. The philosopher then changes his tune and declares that there really is a ‘God,’ that ‘God’ lives within and that ‘God’ comes from me.

Finally, the now ‘religious’ agnostic realizes that his Teacher theory of ‘Oneness’ requires underlying complexity in order to retain its appearance of generality. He finds this complexity in the interlocking interactions of his culture. Thus, the ex-free-thinker concludes by stating that everyone should submit to the dictates of culture, and this is a form of conscience.

I have suggested that the ‘God’ of revealed 'truth' differs from the ‘God’ of philosophy. Despite this, it is possible for one of these ‘God’s to turn into the other. This occurs, for both INFP and INFJ, because thought can stretch beyond their own particular MBTI® category.[DDD]

Let us look first at the case of revealed 'truth.' Suppose that the internal Mercy experiences produced by comprehending a Holy Book become externalized. Those who encounter these religious experiences will then approach religion from a new perspective—that of Extraverted Feeling. If they are then taught a lot of religious doctrine, this will create in them a dominant of Introverted iNtuition. What do you get when you combine an auxiliary of Extraverted Feeling with Introverted iNtuition? The INFJ—the philosopher. The end result will be a shift in peoples’ perception of ‘God.’ Those who 'believed' in a ‘God’ of revealed 'truth' will now turn to a ‘God’ of Buddhism.

Can such a transition occur? Observation indicates that it is common. I have already described how revealed 'truth' surrounds itself naturally with a church system of holy places, holy rituals, holy times, and holy men.[EEE] We have also seen that religious 'belief' leads to religious doctrine, and we shall see later that church systems emphasize study and teaching. Therefore, it is common for the revealed 'truth' of one generation to seed the philosophy of the next.

A similar sort of transition can occur within philosophy. Suppose that philosophers write many books. Suppose also that they turn their focus from general Teacher understanding to the internal feelings that Mercy thought within them senses as they build a general Teacher theory of philosophy.[FFF]

The end result will be a system of revealed 'truth.' Those who follow the philosophers will study their books in order to achieve the Mercy ecstasies described by these philosophers. This succeeding generation will develop INFP processing, because they start with Extraverted iNtuition in order to discover Introverted Feeling. As before, this too leads to a shift in peoples’ perception of ‘God.’ ‘He’ now turns into an external Being teaching moral rules revealed through a Holy Book.

This process may continue. Succeeding generations may respond to the new revealed 'truth' by building shrines, following rituals and appointing clergy, prompting a shift back to philosophy.

Can philosophy really turn into a religion with its own revealed 'truth'? Yes. Library shelves groan under the weight of volumes written by philosophers. Navel-gazers who achieve moments of emotional ecstasy are seldom able to keep their feelings to themselves, but lure others on with visions of personal bliss. And, if we look at Asian society, we see that Buddhist philosophy has created its own religion of Buddhism, with revealed 'truth' and personal encounters with ‘God.’ We also notice that this second-generation spirituality has all of the hallmarks of a religious 'faith.' The emphases may differ, but the elements are there.

Thus, as one generation follows another, the tendency is for philosophy and revealed 'truth' to become increasingly similar. Philosophy acquires religious overtones, and religion has its philosophers.

Philosophy and Buddhism

So far, we have analyzed science and philosophy in Mercy terms, spoken about ‘success’ and ‘failure,’ and looked at the personal costs of accepting emotional 'truth.' Learning, however, really means building a general Teacher understanding—creating the order within complexity that makes Teacher mode happy. Let us therefore take a look at how Teacher theories and feelings are constructed.

Building good Teacher feelings involves an inherent paradox. On the one hand there must be complexity; items must have their own existence and refuse to blend together. On the other hand, there must also be order; the same items that refuse to blend together must in some way work together. The first book compared this interplay to the relationship of a king with his subjects. The maximum positive feeling occurs when the king has many citizens who are independent, but yet still follow his orders. Is such a contradiction possible? Yes. Capitalism and democracy both demonstrate that individual freedom can be combined with corporate structure.

Teacher thought feels good when many items fit together.

Reaching this state of Teacher bliss, though, is not straightforward. In essence, Teacher strategy must go through a process that is similar to personal transformation—it begins with understanding,[GGG] allows this comprehension to be torn apart, and then it reassembles everything at a higher level.[HHH] We see this progression from unity to fragmentation and then back to unity illustrated in many areas. The beginning scholar, for instance, often thinks that he knows everything. However, the more he learns, the more he realizes how little he actually knows. What is happening? As Perceiver strategy gains information, it divides memories into various categories. The result is mental fragmentation. However, if a person continues to learn, then he may eventually find that all of these pieces start to fit together again. The result is Teacher understanding and general principles.

Notice the part that is played by Perceiver thought. Initially, Teacher strategy has its theory—its ‘general’ understanding that explains ‘everything.’ Like the myths of the ancient world, these theories are usually rather unsophisticated, but they do manage to bring some form of order to the complex world experienced by the individual.

This state of Teacher contentment is interrupted by the arrival of Perceiver facts. Facts divide; they separate experiences into distinct groups. Facts say that a cow is not the same as a horse, and that my body and my experiences differ from yours. As far as Teacher thought is concerned, the result is disaster, because its ‘general’ explanations are now shattered into irreconcilable fragments.

How does the mind respond? One option is to follow the path of Buddhism and deny all Perceiver facts: “There is no difference between a cow and horse; you and me are really the same person; our bodies and the entire physical world are only illusions.” This path preserves Teacher feelings at the cost of killing Perceiver thought and condemning all Perceiver persons—myself included—to an existence of mental slavery.

When this option is exercised, Teacher strategy wins the battle, but it loses the war. This is because good Teacher feelings are produced by order within complexity. By rejecting Perceiver facts, the Buddhist loses the distinguishing characteristics that give elegance to his general theory of ‘oneness.’ Now, the only way that he can enjoy his ‘understanding’ is to live within a world of complexity that his theory does not dare to explain. Paradoxically, therefore, the very one who condemns the physical world as an evil illusion becomes emotionally parasitical upon the existence of that same real physical world.

Saying it again, where does the Buddhist philosopher find the complexity needed to give his empty Teacher theory the appearance of generality? From his culture. Philosophy is rooted in emotional 'truth,' which is imposed by emotional experiences from a complex world. This foundation allows the philosopher to assert the Teacher theory that ‘all is one’ while simultaneously and paradoxically accepting the personal Mercy divisions that rule his society.[III]

The Buddhist theory of ‘oneness’ has order without complexity.

·    This is because it denies the real world as illusion.

Confucianism and its deified culture provided the complexity needed by Buddhism.

·    It lives within the real world which Buddhism denies as illusion.

We see these contradictions clearly illustrated by Asian society. Somehow, Buddhism and its ultimate philosophy coexist with Confucianism, which deifies culture, leaders, elders, and ancestors. The same Japanese salaryman who, as a Buddhist, asserts that societal ties are imaginary literally gives his life to his so-called ‘imaginary’ company, returning home to his family only to sleep at night. The same China that made Buddhism a state religion also treated its emperor as a god and proclaimed, in like Confucianist manner, that China was the ‘middle kingdom’ surrounded by a host of barbarians. So much for the idea that ‘all is one’ and that distinctions between people are imaginary. One can see that what really rules, in Buddhist-Confucianism, is Mercy culture and not Teacher understanding. But, what if Perceiver thought notices these contradictions? For the Buddhist anti-logician, this simply proves that the world really is illogical and that one can only achieve universal understanding by going ‘beyond logic.’

There is another reason why Buddhism and Confucianism can collectively create such a major contradiction. I have mentioned that identity naturally develops two forms, one is the me of Mercy identification, and the other the me of the physical body. Remember that these two me’s are a byproduct of the MBTI® S/N split. The me of the physical body operates with Sensing, whereas the me of Mercy identification uses iNtuition. Buddhism preserves the illusion of generality for its theory of ‘Oneness’ by exploiting this distinction. On the iNtuitive side of the split, Buddhism states that ‘all is one’ and that physical matter and objects are all illusions. The fact that most people are mentally split keeps this Buddhist theory from ever touching the me of the physical body, for that me deals with matter and objects, which Buddhism states are all imaginary. Within the region of its split, the Buddhist theory is free to influence the me of Mercy identification. Here it tries to achieve personal unification with ‘God’ through Buddhist worship—it forms the closest possible emotional links between me and ‘oneness.’

On the Sensing side of the split, there is the real world. Here, culture reigns as the supreme dictator over everything that is done by the physical body. This realm is relegated to Confucianism, which worships dead ancestors, not for emotional reasons, but rather to give stability to the facts and actions carried out by the living. Daily life is kept isolated from the Teacher theory of ‘Oneness’ by declaring that Asian culture is ‘inscrutable.’ If it cannot be analyzed by Teacher thought, then it cannot contaminate the Teacher concept of ‘oneness.’

Internally, Buddhism, the me of Mercy identification, and MBTI® iNtuition are separated completely from Confucianism, MBTI® Sensing, and the me of the physical body. Externally they are united by a civilization in which ‘religious’ and ‘secular’ buildings coexist, and ‘religious’ and ‘secular’ people intermingle. Thus, as long as the external Asian world remains intact, the Teacher illusion of order within complexity can survive.[JJJ]

Philosophy and Buddhism illustrate one method of reintegrating Teacher thought. The second option is to accept Perceiver facts, despite the damage that they do initially to primitive Teacher theories. The goal now becomes reintegration, reassembling the pieces that are now more clearly delineated by Perceiver thought.[KKK] Can a mind that is subdivided by Perceiver logic always be reintegrated by a general Teacher theory? We can answer that question by comparing science with philosophy. If we look at the research of science, we do find that masses of individual facts have a habit of coming together into a unified understanding. Scientists still may not know the ultimate ‘grand unified theory’ of physics, but they are a lot closer to this goal than they were a hundred years ago.

In contrast, whenever philosophy starts with grand theories, it eventually concludes that there is no universal answer to life, and it abandons its intellectual castles for the sands of isolated information by a sea of undigested experiences.

The Demise of Philosophy

So what happens when a society embraces a philosophy? Eventually, it finds itself estranged from its intellectual icon. I suggest that this can happen in one of three ways. First, a philosophy may become outdated for Perceiver reasons. By building a worldview, the philosopher brings the undiscussable out into the open. Freud and his research on sexuality provide a good example—this allowed private matters to be discussed. The resulting intellectual openness causes emotional 'truth' to bump up against rational facts. The result is an unstable mixture in which one corrodes the other. The Facilitator personmay be able to keep these diverse elements compartmentalized, but others lack his ‘skill.’ Therefore, society will either begin to doubt some of the emotional 'truth' on which its present philosophy is based, or else it will lose the Perceiver confidence that is needed to believe in some of its facts. In either case, the change in the accepted factual mix will cause the general ‘understanding’ produced by the philosopher to come into question.

Second, philosophical obsolescence may be caused by Mercy factors. To the extent that a philosophy is rooted in emotional 'truth,' to that extent it locks people into self-deception and rationalization. They feel good when they follow the 'beliefs' of their philosophy and they actually feel guilty when they violate these 'rules.' In other words, they have a seared conscience—a stable mindset centered around error and wishful thinking. We have seen that a foundation of emotional 'truth' leads inevitably to pain, suffering, and conflict. Therefore, followers of a philosophy will experience bad consequences. These painful results will increase until one of two things happens: Either suffering and conflict will create a new set of defining experiences, or else the repetition of harmful effects will lead to Perceiver confidence and rational thinking. As before, either of these paths will cause people to question the present philosophy and to look for a new Teacher understanding.

Third, philosophy may turn into full-fledged Buddhism, as we see it in Asia. When this stage is reached, then the previous two factors no longer play a part. That is because the formlessness of ‘all is one’ allows it to explain anything and everything, while at the same time a total imposition of cultural absolutes makes it impossible for anyone to escape the logical contradictions.

A philosophy may become obsolete because of the Perceiver facts it brings together.

It may become obsolete because of the Mercy results that it produces.

At this point, there are two further options. The first is for society to enter the ‘endless loop’ of yin-yang, in which stable culture alternates with a time of troubles. China provides the prime example. Its combination of Buddhism and Confusianism[LLL] survived two barbarian invasions. In both cases, the cultural-religious system eventually remolded itself to fit the new social order and China ‘swallowed up’ the invaders—first the Mongols and then the Manchus.

While a Buddhist society may be able to recover from a physical takeover, I suggest that it has no defense against an invasion of Perceiver facts, if these are tied together by a Teacher theory and backed up by Mercy emotions. Let me expand upon this with two examples.

A barbarian invasion reinvigorates Buddhism.

First, we will look at the Greeks. We touched upon this illustration before. We will now add some details. In its final form, several hundred years after Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle, Greek philosophy turned into a type of Buddhism. The Greek ‘thinkers’ were reasonably content with their meditations until this internal peace was rudely shattered by the cultural changes introduced by Christianity. In A History of Philosophy, B.A.G. Fuller describes the form which Greek philosophy took when faced with the intellectual invasion of Christianity: “The human soul is immeasurably removed by all these intervening levels and kinds of being from the incommunicable source of all existence. Furthermore, she is beset on all sides by evil demons, in whose existence and power Iamblichus believed no less devoutly than did Porphyry.[MMM] Nor is the ladder of salvation sufficient ever to unite her with God, or even with the Divine Reason. In the highest possible state to which she may attain, she is still in the toils of sensible experience and attachment to the body, which cling to her beyond the grave and weigh her down to all eternity. The space separating her from God, never so tremendous for Plotinus that it might not be recrossed by the soul in search of him, has become an impassable gulf, which even redemption cannot bridge.”

And who were these ‘evil demons’? They were the Greek gods who were being displaced by the new Christianity: “The gods worshiped by the conflicting sects, the Olympians as the people conceived and worshiped them, were not in Porphyry’s eyes the true gods. They were evil spirits (in whose existence, incidentally, he devoutly believed) masquerading as divinities, and pandering, through the prayers and sacrifices they demanded and the oracles they delivered, to the unholy desires and the material satisfactions of their devotees.”

Notice the two major effects of Christianity upon Greek philosophy. First, me became separated from the Buddhist ‘God’ of oneness. Second, the previous cultural absolutes—the Greek gods of Olympus—turned into powerful demons who attacked me. Let us analyze this in terms of the two me’s.

Suppose that a Buddhist country is invaded by a horde of barbarians. The invaders could use force to replace one set of cultural absolutes with another, but the basic mindset of emotionally based 'truth' would remain the same, because the barbarians would take over by attacking the existing Perceiver 'rules,' 'laws' and 'structure.' This would re-invigorate Buddhism by smashing the intellectual 'bricks' of Perceiver 'facts,' thus restoring the philosophical ‘vista’ of Teacher ‘oneness.’ The me of Mercy identification would then find it easier to identify with ‘God.’ On the Sensing side of the iNtuition/Sensing chasm, a barbarian dictatorship would impose lawless and irrational demands upon its subjects, giving their me of the physical body no freedom to pursue individuality or follow common sense—again this would breathe life into the iNtuitive Buddhist side of the equation.

As for affecting the S/N split in the left hemisphere itself, barbarians might act, but they lack understanding—that is what makes them so barbaric. Therefore, while they overturn objects and destroy people[NNN] within the realm of Sensing, they leave iNtuition untouched. Thus, a Buddhist theory of ‘Oneness’ survives unscathed. In fact, the looting and burning only reinforces the assertion that divisions and objects of physical matter are temporary illusions. Moreover, barbarians lack the skills to run a country. Therefore, when they take over, they have to delegate details of operating the civilization to those whom they have conquered. This reinforces the Confucian precept that actions are dictated by those in authority.

Now, let us look at another type of invasion. Suppose that a religion comes along, as Christianity did in Greek society, which teaches revealed 'truth' and which propagates itself through the light of conscience rather than the force of arms. What effect would this have upon Buddhist meditation? We will answer this question by looking again at the two me’s. Revealed 'truth' uses solid Perceiver information to define the emotional me. It also attaches Perceiver meanings to words and 'beliefs.' This makes concepts such as ‘true’ and ‘false’ conceivable. And, because revealed 'truth' is rooted in Mercy feelings, the Source of 'truth'—now in CAPITAL letters—becomes labeled both ‘Right’ and ‘Good’ while opposing sources, such as the Greek ‘gods,’ are labeled both ‘wrong’ and ‘evil.’

Meanwhile, the me of the physical body remains intact. Worse than that—for the Buddhist, revealed 'truth' becomes a source of conscience which guides external behavior. Thus the hard, physical objects of the external world reach into the emotional mind of the philosopher and rip apart his Teacher theory of ‘oneness.’

An invasion of Christianity makes Buddhist meditation impossible.

We have seen the effect that such an ‘invasion’ had upon the poor Greek ‘Buddhist’ philosopher. He may have thought that he was following a general Teacher theory, but his mind was really integrated around the Mercy absolutes of his surroundings. Suddenly, Christianity came along and changed his culture; it redefined all of his Mercy absolutes. Unfortunately for the philosopher, since this new culture with its Perceiver 'facts' inhibited mysticism, the philosopher soon found that his Eastern ‘God’ was now far, far away. However, the old culture still lived on in the mind of the philosopher, for it was supported by an internal ‘general’ Teacher theory. But, the invading ‘Christian’ culture—the new source of 'truth' for the Mercy-based philosophers—labeled all of these old ‘gods’ as ‘wrong’ and ‘evil.’

Thus the Greek philosopher was impaled upon the horns of a dilemma, caught in the web of a mental structure that stretched until it snapped. This is because his philosophy had sufficient Teacher coherence to protect a 'belief' in the old ‘Gods’ while it also had enough Mercyvulnerability to be reprogrammed by the standards of the new culture.

Let us move on to a second example, that of Samurai Japan. The dominant religion in Japan around 1500 was a variant of Buddhism know as Zen.[OOO] This Eastern world with its tidy gardens and messy wars first encountered the West in 1543 when a Portuguese ship was wrecked upon Japanese shores. Along with the Portuguese came trade and missionaries. This set up a cultural conflict. Which side would win? The Japanese had the Teacher theory of Buddhism and the Mercy emotions of a strong culture, glued together by the swift sword of the Samurai warrior. Opposing this were Westerners with their Mercy trinkets of mechanical progress, such as the musket, and their Teacher revealed 'truth' of Christianity, brought together by bands of idealistic, fortune hunting explorers.

During the first century of interaction, the West had the upper hand. Trade brought new ideas and novel gadgets to Japan, and many Japanese converted to Christianity. Eventually, the Japanese hierarchy became worried, and in 1612, they declared Christianity to be illegal and inaugurated an official persecution. Thousands of Japanese Christians were literally crucified for their beliefs. This edict and its enforcement sparked a rebellion that took five months to suppress. In restoring order, the government declared that every Japanese citizen now had to belong to a Buddhist temple, and that once a year each temple had to guarantee that none of its members were Christian. Ultimately, in 1639, Portuguese ships were forbidden to visit Japan and all Western trade was limited to the port of Nagasaki.

We can draw some conclusions from this cross-cultural encounter. First, when faced with the ‘Western’ religion of Christianity, Buddhism and its symbiotic Japanese culture were driven to the anti-Buddhist step of declaring that everything was not one, and that the Japanese part of this ‘one’ could only survive by using extreme force to wipe out the European part of this ‘one.’ Second, the Western admixture of religious self-abasement, treasure-seeking selfishness, religious blind 'faith,' and rational thinking was not potent enough to resist this counterattack.

The Japanese international quarantine lasted until 1854, when Admiral Perry used gunboat diplomacy to open Japan up again to the West. This time, Japan caved in completely, and since then it has followed a policy of massive Westernization.[PPP] Today, Japan has the second largest economy in the world. Why was the outcome so different? First, Western Teacher understanding had grown in breadth and in Perceiver content. Scientific thought had matured and religious 'belief' was more individualistic.[QQQ] Second, Western technology had also advanced. Perry’s gunboats were much more powerful than the Portuguese frigates and galleons.

But weren’t the American guns simply another form of barbaric invasion? No. The goal of Perry’s mission was not to take over the country but rather to enforce a diplomatic mission. The ensuing treaties may have been one-sided, but unlike what happened in the Mongol invasion, the Japanese survived with their country intact and still in Japanese hands. More importantly, though, the American ships had been preceded by two centuries of gradual Western infiltration. Despite the official policy of isolation, many Japanese had been able to learn about Western thought and technology. Thus, Japan recognized the inevitability of Western dominance and chose to open up officially to the West. In other words, Perceiver facts accompanied by science and technology eventually overcame Japanese Buddhism.

Japanese Buddhism has reacted to this Westernization, however, in typical Buddhist fashion. A general theory of ‘Oneness’ which rejects Perceiver logic is like a shapeless blanket that covers anything and everything so long as what is underneath contains no sharp Perceiver ‘edges’ that can cut into the cloth and tear it. This ‘blanket policy’ has allowed Japanese society to respond to every Western import by covering it with the ‘cloth’ of Japanese ‘culture,’ all the while maintaining the ‘inscrutability’ of this very same culture. Zen Buddhism may have given up the periphery, but it still occupies the castle at the center of the Japanese ‘island.’ In fact, alien imports have actually revitalized Buddhism, for they add the complexity which a ‘theory of oneness’ requires but cannot itself provide. And now that the subjective core of the West is ‘post-Christian,’ learning is starting to go both ways. We too are beginning to spout the nonsense of Buddhism.

But how can Western scientific thought and action be juxtaposed with Eastern irrationalism? Because of the MBTI® T/F split. Buddhism occupies Feeling, science involves Thinking, and never the twain shall meet. Remember that our modern technological world may integrate Sensing and iNtuition, but it also preserves a strict separation between Thinking and Feeling.[RRR]

But doesn’t the integration between science and technology remove the S/N split that is required to sustain Buddhism? No, for Japan has taken to Western progress in a way that preserves the S/N division. The consumer electronics which surround us tell us that Japan, and its Asian brethren, are much better at technology than they are at basic science. In other words, the Westernization has been limited largely to the non-Buddhist Sensing side of the S/N split. Therefore, within iNtuition, Buddhist meditation, parasitic now upon technology as well as Confucianist hierarchy, can remain intact.

Why Philosophy?

By now, we may have the impression that philosophy is an unmitigated disaster. To counter this, I suggest that philosophy provides three very important positive functions.[SSS] First, it provides a sort of mental ‘snapshot’ of peoples’ current mental state. The Facilitator philosopher brings the idols of his society and his childhood out into the open and discusses them honestly and accurately. For instance, Freud may have been incapable of real personal change, but he did develop a good description of his own personal neuroses. And, once a topic has been raised, then it can be discussed openly. This allows Teacher theories to develop and to spread.[TTT] The ‘pebbles and ice’ mixture of facts and 'facts' may be an unstable foundation for thinking, but it can nevertheless support a relatively accurate general Teacher theory—for a while. And it is precisely this instability that creates, for a period of time, an engine for change. Each philosophy, as it is accepted, alters the societal mixture of 'facts' and facts, and leads in turn to the formation of a new philosophy.

This leads us to our second point. Why is a temporary understanding useful, and why is change necessary? Because of mental ‘life.’ Remember that life requires an integrated network of Perceiver, Server, Teacher and Mercy content. Philosophy is one way to integrate emotional Mercy and Teacher memories using the skeleton of currently known Perceiver 'facts' and accepted Server actions. And, because one philosophy leads naturally to another, there is sufficient novelty to keep this mental ‘life’ alive.[UUU]

Philosophy brings the hidden out into the open where it can be discussed and analyzed.

Philosophy provides a temporary framework for mental ‘life.’

Philosophy gives emotional comfort for painful experiences.

Third, philosophy soothes the Mercy pain of normal life with the positive feelings of a general Teacher understanding. No individual can handle the Mercy pain of continuing guilt and lasting failure. While rationalization may be a poor way to deal with emotional hurt, it is better than nothing. Is it the best answer? No. It is far better, in the long term, to follow rational thinking. Does this mean that one should attack philosophy? No. The example of China shows us that philosophy cannot be displaced by force. However, rational thinking that produces both Teacher understanding and positive Mercy benefits will always displace philosophy. In other words, ‘life’ must be replaced by life.

In passing, I suggest that there is a similarity between philosophy and the mental condition of manic-depression. When a person is in the manic state, he is full of positive feelings, and thinks that his Teacher explanations are totally adequate. However, if this Teacher ‘understanding’ is built upon a faulty foundation, then it will eventually fail, and when it does, the only feeling that will remain is the Mercy pain. This leads to depression, until Teacher strategy can again develop some general ‘theory,’ permitting another episode of mania.

Thus, a society that is led by philosophers tends to become ‘manic-depressive.’ A philosopher is seldom appreciated during his own lifetime. This is because Teacher thought in the average person is holding on to the current philosophy, developed by a previous philosopher, and does not want to let go of its emotional Teacher comfort. However, eventually the world view of society collapses and another Teacher ‘covering’ is needed. The obvious candidate is the new philosophy, because it was based upon the ‘rock and ice’ mixture of the present culture. Thus, the philosopher is discovered after he dies.

Paradoxically, the individual who tried so hard during his lifetime to question all assumptions then becomes, when he is dead, a source of revealed 'truth.' Thus, as I mentioned before, philosophy may turn into a bonafide religion, with its own ‘Holy Book.’ But what type of book is produced, and how ‘holy’ is it? It depends upon when philosophy does its writing. If the books are written by philosophers during their temporary logical phase, then these books can help their students to ‘graduate’ from the school of revealed 'truth.' However, ifBuddhist philosophers decide to pen their thoughts, then what is produced is an un-Holy un-Book. Why do I say this? First, a Holy Book is, by definition, distinct from all other volumes. But, Buddhism states that all such divisions are imaginary. Thus, the special book teaches that nothing is special. Hence the term ‘un-Holy.’ Second, a book is written using symbols that have meanings. For instance, the three letters ‘c-a-t’ have a specific definition that is different from the sequence ‘h-a-t.’ Meanings are defined by Perceiver thought. But, Buddhism says that its theory of oneness contradicts Perceiver logic. How can you teach a general Teacher theory which opposes Perceiver meaning by using Teacher words that use Perceiver meaning? Hence the term ‘un-Book.’

Buddhism becomes in consequence a religious ‘dog in the manger’—it is unable to eat the hay of understanding itself, but it prevents other animals from getting at the food. We can see this illustrated by the history of China. Before the industrial revolution, China was the most advanced country in the world. It was the major source, for about two millennia, of most technological advances, including paper, gunpowder, and even equal-tempered tuning. Two centuries before Colombus, the Chinese had a fleet of ships that were capable of exploring the entire world. However, the Chinese mindset prevented them from exploiting their advances. Instead, Chinese technology was copied and used by the West. Why? Because Buddhism as revealed 'truth' made it impossible for its students to graduate.[VVV]

Notice that we have touched again upon the connection between the INFJ and the INFP. Philosophy is developed by the INFJ. But, philosophy generally expresses itself through writing. The resulting books can become sources of 'truth' for succeeding generations, provoking the development of INFP thought. Followers of these books will set up schools of thought with Mercy-based experts. These various ways of thinking will crumble as they collide with each other and with reality. The resulting societal ‘earthquakes’ will trigger the development of philosophy, leading to INFJ-type Thinking. Like the swinging of a pendulum, these two modes of thought oscillate back and forth.[WWW] But, during each shift, when the level of logic is at a maximum, it is possible for other modes of thinking to be birthed as well.

In summary, we can see that all of the methods of thought that we have studied so far are temporaryNone of them lasts forever. Revealed 'truth' has a finite lifetime. Without a constant stream of students, it ultimately deteriorates into idolatry and ignorance. Similarly, philosophy is either outgrown by the next generation, or in contrast revered as revealed 'truth,' until it too congeals into the intellectual purgatory of tradition and Buddhism. Buddhism itself is only viable when it applies part of the time—the meditator requires a society upon which he can turn his back, a body that he can deny.

That leaves us with science. Hasn’t science transformed our world? Has it not grown for centuries? Yes. It has altered both our world and our thinking, but it has left us unchanged. And when people remain childish, then technology amplifies their idolatry and preserves their stupidity. Here too, learning and understanding eventually die out as political correctness, government interference, organized labor, and corporate empires replace rational thinking and individual responsibility.

What is the answer? I suggest again that it lies in personal transformation. All of the previous options reached a dead end because they were incomplete. None of them built a general Teacher understanding which included both me and my world; none combined objective with subjective. All of them involved a fundamental split. In other words, they all subscribed to the two fundamental 'beliefs' of today’s world—there is a split between the objective and the subjective, and the subjective is incomprehensible. In terms of MBTI®, they failed to tackle the MBTI® T/F split.

The Stillbirth of Science

At the end of our discussion about emotional 'facts' and pain and suffering (yes, I know, those words again), we asked ourselves whether a living, growing society could be built upon a foundation of idolatry. We saw that it was possible to have growth at the price of continuing conflict, if three requirements were met. I would now like to turn our attention from the practical to the intellectual and look at the type of rational thinking that can emerge in a society which is rooted in a subjective core of emotional 'facts.' When discussing society and physical growth we looked to Arnold Toynbee for inspiration. Now that we know some more about mental symmetry and MBTI® divisions, let us see if we can use logic to work out principles for intellectual development.

Suppose that a society or a civilization is rooted in emotional 'truth.' What type of rational thinking can emerge? Obviously, it is impossible to expect logical analysis within the subjective, for here Mercy feelings are in charge. It is only in the objective, where Mercy emotions are weak, that rational Perceiver logic has any chance of appearing.

Under emotional 'truth,' intellectual growth is possible in the objective.

·    The subjective is ruled by 'truth.'

This type of intellectual growth strengthens the T/F split.

Suppose that people do learn to think rationally in the objective. What is the result? A T/F split. Why? Because Thinking will emerge in regions where Feeling does not rule. In fact, the more that people learn to think, the stronger will be this T/F division. On the one hand, as people become rational in the objective, it will become increasingly clear to them how irrational they are in the subjective. On the other hand, as Perceiver confidence grows in the objective, the subjective will protect its 'truth' by clinging more closely to its defining experiences.

Therefore, we conclude that such a society will not promote personal transformation, because this involves bridging the T/F split. Actually, we can make a stronger statement: If a society that is rooted in emotional 'truth' pursues intellectual growth, then this development will make it more difficult for individuals within this society to reach personal transformation. Why? Because intellectual growth strengthens the T/F split—the division that personal transformation seeks to integrate.[XXX]

But if personal transformation is discouraged, then what type of growth is possible? Societal transformation. If T/F cannot be bridged, then the only option left is to tackle the S/N split.[YYY] And what type of intellectual activity integrates Sensing with iNtuition? Science and technology. Science develops iNtuition to understand the world of Sensing; technology uses iNtuition to alter the realm of Sensing.

Are science and technology logical? Yes, double yes! They are full of logic, use nothing but logic, and refuse to coexist with any form of illogic. Does this logic include feelings? No. Modern science and technology are objective. In MBTI® language, they use pure Thinking and no Feeling. Thus, we conclude that science and technology can develop in a society which is rooted in emotional 'truth.'

So, how can S and N be integrated? In order to answer this question in detail, we need to know more about Server thought. I have mentioned that Sensing gives prominence to Server strategy. Intuition, in contrast, is driven mainly by Teacher thought. Therefore, integrating S/N means tying together Server and Teacher strategies.[ZZZ] And what is the ‘glue’ that joins them together? Perceiver logic.[AAAA] Those who cannot use logic are incapable of exploiting either science or technology. For them, the theories are always ‘too esoteric’ and the gadgets ‘too complicated.’ They continually press the wrong buttons, and their VCRs stay blinking at 12:00 Midnight.

Therefore, I suggest that science can only be birthed if four requirements are met. First, a society that is based in 'facts' must leave some area open in which people can think logically. At some point, culture must stand back and declare that it will not use emotional status to impose 'truth' upon Perceiver strategy. Second, Perceiver analysis must exploit this void and learn to think. The intellectual vacuum left by society must be filled, in some way, by logical thought.

Before going on, let me illustrate these first two points through the use of an analogy. Compare iNtuition and Sensing to two ‘sheets’ of material. If one wants to ‘stick’ these two panes together, then one must use the ‘glue’ of Perceiver logic. Why is Perceiver logic like glue? Because Perceiver confidence is rooted in solid connections—which, by definition, are glue-like. Why can emotional 'truth' not be used for ‘glue’? Because, it is rooted in isolated Mercy experiences, and therefore keeps items separated—the very opposite of glue. How does one develop Perceiver ‘glue’? By combining mental freedom with logic—our first two requirements for intellectual growth.

Now that we have good glue, what is the next step? We must prepare the surfaces to be bonded. If two pieces of material are to stick together, they must fit together. Glue cannot hold when pieces do not have matching surfaces, or if these surfaces are separated by major air gaps. Thus, the last two requirements for intellectual growth ensure that Teacher and Server thought become compatible with one another—so that they can be ‘glued’ together.

On the one side, Server strategy must be linked to Teacher thought. Server processing must be willing to go beyond mere actions and be willing to consider abstract theories. On the other side, Teacher theorizing must include Server actions. That is, all iNtuitive ‘castles in the air’ must anchor themselves somehow in the ‘solid ground’ of Sensing.

So, do Sensing and iNtuition have the potential to develop ‘matching surfaces’? Can they be glued together to form a single entity? Let us examine this question. Sensing, on the one hand, deals with the real body. A body grows in childhood, matures in early adulthood, and decays in old age. Thus, Sensing is forced to learn over time about change and growth. Second, a body is subject to natural law. As it gets cut and scraped, Sensing learns from experience that the universe is governed by principles of cause and effect. Finally, a body uses action to affect its environment. We conclude that Sensing has all of the characteristics needed to decipher the scientific order behind the natural world. What it lacks is the thought itself, because Sensing, in isolation, lives only in the here-and-now.

Science can only be birthed if four requirements are met:

·    Emotional 'truth' must pull back from some area and leave room for Perceiver logic.

·    Rational thought must step in to fill this void.

·    Server actions and sequences must extend to include Teacher thought.

·    Teacher theorizing must include Server actions.

What provides this thought? MBTI® iNtuition. Unfortunately, raw iNtuition lacks the presuppositions of Sensing. It ignores change and growth, it rejects cause and effect, and it remains passive. Put Sensing and iNtuition together, though, and what emerges is modern science. As I said earlier, science and technology integrate iNtuition and Sensing. Intuition without Sensing leads to philosophy, whereas Sensing without iNtuition creates culture.[BBBB]

Now that we have developed some tools, let us look in more detail at the four requirements for birthing scientific thought within a society that is rooted in emotional 'truth.' Later on, we will compare these with the three prerequisites for a growing society and then we will see how science actually came into existence within history.

The first requirement, stated in a different way, is wobbling idols. If the idols of a certain society are firmly in place, then emotional 'facts' remain secure and it is impossible for Perceiver thought to wake up from its trance and to begin to think. However, if the idols begin to crumble, then any 'facts' that come from these defining experiences will fall within the threshold of uncertainty. Perceiver strategy will be freed from its emotional ‘shackles,’ and Perceiver observation can begin.

The first factor makes it possible for Perceiver thought to develop. However, Perceiver strategy will not fill this intellectual vacuum with rational thought unless it already knows how to follow the rules of logic. That is the second requirement. In some way, Perceiver thought must have already learned how to think. But isn’t this a contradiction? How can Perceiver strategy begin to operate before it wakes up? I suggest that we already know of two possible methods through which this can happen—one associated with the me of the physical body, and the other with the me of Mercy identification.

One way for Perceiver thought to acquire the tools of logic is through common sense. What is the source of common sense? Interaction between my body and the physical world. Obviously, this method involves the me of the physical body. What happens if there is not enough common sense? Then, the result will not be science but rather natural philosophy.

The method of common sense may fail for two reasons. First, the mindset may be warped. Those who insist upon holding on to feelings regardless of their environment can be quite successful at avoiding common sense.[CCCC] Second, theenvironment may be distorted. If people live in an artificial world that defies logic, then Perceiver thought cannot develop normally.[DDDD]

It is also possible for Perceiver logic to develop by studying a fixed repository of revealed 'truth'—either ‘religious’ or ‘secular.’ Just as common sense grows by interacting with the external world, so interacting with the words of a book can also cause logical thinking to emerge, simply because Perceiver strategy is required to interpret the words.

This method will be defeated if the verbal environment is distorted. If a textbook or Holy Book denies the possibility of logic, then studying it will obviously not lead to logic. It is evident, for instance, that studying Buddhist texts can never develop Perceiver thought, no matter how long one cogitates.

A logical textbook is necessary, but it is not sufficient. If an individual insists upon approaching his book through irrational mysticism, then even the best textbook in the world will not build Perceiver logic. The result, in such a case, can at most be blind 'faith.'

Let us move on now to the third and fourth requirements, those of Teacher/Server compatibility. On the one hand, iNtuition must stretch to include Sensing. Sensing, on its part, is centered around Server actions—these are sequences which involve the physical body and physical matter. What emerges when iNtuition studies actions and physical sequences? A sense of cause and effect. Intuition will follow its pattern of jumping mentally from the current physical situation to the probable physical outcome and eventually notice repeated patterns.

Notice that just talking aboutphysical change is not sufficient. For instance, Roger Bacon, an English Franciscan friar, wrote extensively, back in the thirteenth century, about the scientific method. However, his thinking did not give birth to science. Why? Because few of his ‘experiments’ went beyond words. He wrote about many possible experiments, but performed only a few. Thus, his thought remained locked within iNtuition and did not enter the physical realm of Sensing and action.

It is also possible to discover cause and effect by studying a Holy Book or a scientific text. But, if this is to occur, then such a book must not merely chronicle people, events, rituals, or culture. Instead, it must describe, with honesty, a process by which these elements can change over time. In religious terms, a Holy Book must include personal change and growth—or salvation.[EEEE]

Thus, for instance, a book that presents the theory of MBTI® would not qualify as a tutor of cause and effect because this theory, by itself, is only a static description of personality—a ‘snapshot’ of the mind.

But why salvation? Because the goal is for iNtuition to extend all the way to Sensing. This can only happen if the mental changes taught by the Holy Book are applied in the here-and-now world of physical action. In other words, what a person studies must have implications for how he acts. Growth that extends to the physical body and the physical environment is, by definition, salvation.

The last requirement is to go in the other direction as well, and have Sensing extend into iNtuition. This will not happen if Server actions are guided solely by culture and tradition. Why? Because this pressure imprisons action within a mental straightjacket. Culture is provincial; it refuses to learn from ‘them.’ Tradition says, “This is how we do things, and we will not change.” Intuition, in contrast, goes beyond the here-and-now and considers other possibilities: “Maybe we could do things differently. Maybe there are other ways of acting.”[FFFF]

I should emphasize that change, by itself, is not sufficient. Rather, Perceiver logic must be used to alter actions. Revolution, for example may change Sensing, but it does not generally make it compatible with iNtuition. Why? Because it alters Server actions and the Sensing world in a way that violatesPerceiver rules, facts, and principles.[GGGG]

Russian communism shows what happens when a society attempts to integrate Sensing and iNtuition without the help of Perceiver ‘glue.’ Workers, in this system, lived within Sensing. They used their physical bodies to change the external world. Party members, in contrast, restricted their activity to the realm of iNtuition. They did the thinking and the planning, and they avoided physical labor.

Perceiver ‘glue’ is needed to ‘stick’ Sensing and iNtuition together.

Unfortunately, these two groups seldom managed to get together. The communist party, from its base in iNtuition, tried to transform Sensing through the development of all-encompassing central plans. Invariably, though, these grandiose schemes went awry and remained castles in the air. Why? Because these plans ignored Perceiver facts, Perceiver differences, and Perceiver rules. Without this Perceiver ‘glue,’ Sensing refused to ‘stick’ to iNtuition.

A similar affliction affected Russian workers. Despite massive efforts to organize the peasant and the laborer, Sensing continually rebelled against the demands of iNtuition. Again, I suggest that a lack of Perceiver content was to blame. Even today, the Russian population follows its collective Mercy heart, responds to the demands of the moment, and refuses to accept the rule of law. Without Perceiver ‘glue,’ it is impossible for the masses to go beyond Sensing.

One major exception exists. Over the years, a very capable Russian intelligentsia has emerged, which does manage to bridge action and thinking. This is because, within their respective fields, these Russian experts have acquired extensive Perceiver knowledge.

While the four requirements for the birth of science may sound like a tough list to meet, I suggest that this has been achieved at least twice in world history. Before we look at this, however, we need to tie up a few loose ends and discuss one more topic.

S/N and Identity

Earlier on, I suggested that the S/N split is responsible for dividing personal identity into two fragments: Imagination and wishful thinking from iNtuition propel the me of Mercy identification, while interaction with the real world of Sensing develops the me of the physical body. If S/N has such a large effect upon personal identity, and if science and technology are bringing S and N together, then one would expect that modern civilization is altering personal identity in major ways. I suggest that this is the case.

Let us look first at the physical me. Compare our modern physical world with that of our ancestors. Before the invention of the railroad, for instance, most people spent all of their lives within a few kilometers of their birthplace, and very few had gone faster than fifty kilometers per hour. Today, we travel into space and visit the bottom of the sea, moving at speeds which were then considered unimaginable. However, the average modern city dweller has never had to shoot a wild animal and would not know how to provide his own food and shelter, skills which our ancestors had to develop.

If physical interaction with the external environment develops the me of the physical body, we can work out how technology has changed the me of our physical bodies by examining how technology has altered our physical world. In general, I suggest that natural reality has been replaced by anartificial world. The plants and animals that used to surround us are now, for most people, far away. Instead, Sensing is filled with what used to be invisible. Everywhere we go, buttons, levers, handsets, screens and gauges connect our Sensing world with the formerly hidden realm of iNtuition.

A similar shift, I suggest, has occurred to the me of Mercy identification. Technology has changed our heroes, given us new diversions, and produced new methods of entertainment. Before the advent of worldwide communications, it was only possible for people to identify emotionally with local heroes, the personalities they heard about in myth and legend, or the characters they read about in books. Thus, each region had its own heroes, and imagination was forced to play a major role in identification.

Today, emotional identification is, in general, far more public and external. Thanks to the global reach of media, the whole world can identify with the same traumatic incident. And, most people find the special effects of modern movies far more enticing than their own imagination.

The end result is that the two me’s now overlap. On the one hand, the me of the physical body is continually forced to make iNtuitive leaps. Consider, for example, the telephone, a simple object occupying the world of Sensing. When we pick it up and talk to someone, we are forced to ignore our physical senses and iNtuitively leap to the mental image of the person with whom we are speaking.

On the other hand, the me of emotional identification can turn increasingly to the Sensing world for its excitement. The roller coaster, for instance, allows me to identify with feelings of physical terror. No skills or knowledge from the me of the physical body are required to experience this excitement. Similarly, with a video game, we insert a coin and we instantly become a hero—in vivid graphics with surround sound.

Now that we have looked at the details, let us step back and consider the larger view. In particular, I need to clear up a potential contradiction. In the previous book, I stated that the me of Mercy identification was associated with subjectivethought—MBTI® Feeling, and that the me of the physical body was connected with objective thought—MBTI® Thinking. Here, I am saying that iNtuition and the emotional me are related, and that Sensing and the physical me are connected. Which is it?

The answer, I suggest, depends upon whether we are trying to define me or guide its operation.[HHHH] We looked at this distinction briefly a few pages back, but the topic is potentially confusing, so we will go through it a second time. Integrating T/F will define me, whereas bridging S/N will change the way that me operates. We can see how this works by reviewing the relationship between the simple styles. Suppose that I use Perceiver confidence to build solid emotional connections between emotional Mercy experiences. Among other things, I will acquire a self-image, as Perceiver strategy ties together the Mercy experiences that belong to me. I will also realize that me can operate in one of two ways—a physical me defined by Sensing, and an emotional me guided by iNtuition.

Integrating T/F defines me by creating a self-image.

Integrating S/N defines the operation of me by turning people into professionals.

Suppose, in contrast, that I develop Server skills, combined with a general Teacher understanding. The result is an area of expertise; I have just become a professional.

What distinguishes the professional from the average person? The way in which he operates. A professional specializes—he spends most of his time performing a limited range of actions. What he does do, he does well. In addition, a professional is given a specific verbal label: Teacher, plumber, doctor, lawyer, and so on. This label defines, not his identity, but rather his skills.

Now let us take this comparison a step further. What happens when a number of people integrate S/N and turn into professionals? Does the T/F division disappear? No. Instead, it becomes more obvious. Eventually, a huge gap opens up between objective and subjective, the type of division that I described in the previous volume.[IIII] Does the average person notice this split? Of course not. That type of personal insight would require Perceiver confidence in the area of personal emotions, precisely what is lacking.

The separation between objective and subjective will be noticed, however, by any individual that pursues personal transformation. Everywhere he goes, in fact, he will come face to face with this ‘Berlin wall.’ Eventually, he may even become sufficiently annoyed to write a book about the subject—a work which the average person will see no reason to read.

Now let us change our perspective to the specialist who bridges S/N. What does he think of the individual who is integrating T/F? He sees a huge division in his personal operation. This is because adding Perceiver confidence to Mercy identity has two different effects: First, it defines and limits the existing me. Second, it creates an imaginary image of what could be me. Thus, the person undergoing personal transformation must live in the Sensing world of the present while at the same time using iNuition to explore future possibilities.

The one who has integrated only S/N will look at the person bridging T/F and say, “You act strange. I can’t figure you out. You are a nice person, but sometimes you act normally, while at other times you choose, for some bizarre reason, to act in ways which go against the stream of society and which make your life much more difficult.” Why the ‘nice person’? Because the one who integrates T/F has struggled to bring rational thought to the primitive feelings of his childish me. Why the seemingly random acts of ‘bucking against society?’ Because the one who tackles T/F first is caught between two masters. On the one hand, he has a physical body whose physical needs must be met. On the other hand, he sees internally that something better is possible, and therefore chooses not to do actions that would contradict his internal vision of what-could-be.[JJJJ]

So, if bridging S/N and connecting T/F both bring integration to personal identity, then there is no difference between the two, right? After all, why distinguish between defining me and bringing integration to the operation of me. The important thing is that people are becoming more civilized, right? Wrong. That is because of what it means to be human. We live in bodies made of physical matter—Perceiver objects composed of Mercysubstance. These bodies are capable of performing Server actions. Notice the order: Mercy to Perceiver to Server.[KKKK] Personal transformation respects this order, for it uses Perceiver confidence to define the Mercy experiences that belong to me. This creates a discrepancy between present and possible identity, which can then be eliminated with Server action. Because personal transformation is consistent with humanity, it preserves the individual and can be applied by the individual.[LLLL]

Integrating T/F is compatible with humanity.

·    Self-image defines us as humans living within a physical body.

Integrating S/N is incompatible with humanity.

·    It uses verbal labels to classify the operation of people.

·    A human lives in a Mercy-based physical body, not a Teacher-based verbal label.

In contrast, a process that begins with S/N is not compatible with humanity. What happens when a human integrates S/N? He specializes. A specialist loses the ability to provide for most of his personal needs. Instead, he becomes very proficient in his area of expertise, while remaining relatively unskilled in most other areas. This leads to objective excellence[MMMM] combined with subjective stupidity. In the objective is his area of expertise in which Teacher emotion rules, while the subjective is centered around his remaining core of Mercy feelings. How does the specialist cope with his personal inadequacy? Through spatial location. Each professional has a workshop or office at which he works, and all personal needs are met by going to the appropriate location and specialist. This is an external solution compatible with the physical changes produced by science and technology.

The end result is social transformation, in which individuals lose internal wholeness and become integrated through external cooperation. Notice the order. Professionalism begins with Server confidence and Teacher emotion, and adds to this Perceiver connections.[NNNN]

Notice also that both of these steps violate our humanity. While our physical bodies force us to acknowledge our physical surroundings, our mouths can talk about any subject we choose. Professionalism puts a lid on our speech and restricts our words to our area of expertise.[OOOO] Likewise, our legs are capable of carrying us to many locations, and our hands are able to perform many actions. Modern civilization, though, limits where we can go: “Do Not Enter. Only authorized personnel permitted in this area.” Similarly, it restricts what we can do. Thus, we have learned that libraries are for reading, garages for fixing cars, dentist’s offices for fixing teeth, and so on.

But, how could a modern world operate without such restrictions? It couldn’t. That is the point. Social transformation makes our world inhuman by placing restrictions upon humans that limit their ability to act as humans within physical bodies.

Is social transformation bad? No. As long as it is accompanied by personal transformation. But, when S/N is bridged while T/F is kept separate, then humanity suffers.[PPPP] If a technological society continues to pursue social transformation, then internal identity eventually becomes so fragmented that personal transformation can no longer be followed. Similarly, the external world becomes so organized that those who do pursue personal transformation have no chance of implementing their visions. As we shall see later, this combination describes the fascist state. Everyone follows orders and individuality means nothing.

Now let us suppose that people follow only personal transformation. I suggest that this option is also inadequate. Suppose that personal transformation encounters a problem. How does it respond? It begins by applying Perceiver logic to the realm of the personal: “How does this situation affect me? What should I learn from this encounter? What is the correct way to respond?” Once this soul-searching is over, then personal transformation does what is necessary to resolve the situation.

This exhibition of personal responsibility is admirable, and today’s world could use more individuals like this. Not only do such people solve their own problems, but they also feel motivated to come and help you out. That is because Perceiver confidence, among others things, builds conscience, causing one person to empathize with the feelings of another.

However, what about getting together and changing the situation so that it does not occur again, or banding together to improve the surroundings? That is the societal response—the sort of thing that modern man expects from ‘them’ whenever something happens. However, this approach will not be taken by those who pursue personal transformation to the exclusion of social transformation. Instead, they will ‘cope,’ they will learn how ‘to live with it.’ Thus, a mind that focuses solely upon personal change can become so locked into the mindset of ‘responding correctly to the situation’ that it becomes just as fatalistic in its acceptance of ‘natural order’ as the Buddhist who ‘solves’ the problem of human suffering by denying the existence of physical reality.

Social without personal transformation leads to inhumanity: My world changes but I won’t.

Personal without social transformation leads to resignation: I can change but my world won’t.

This masochism is most common when people learn principles of personal transformation through a system of revealed 'truth.' This is because the attitude of ‘suffer, learn, and cope’ is consistent with the demand of revealed 'truth' that me remain insignificant. Thus, it is easy to combine personal development with self-denial. It is much harder for the ‘suffering student’ to emerge from his passivity and think about changing the situation, because that would mean publicly questioning the assumption that ‘me is nothing.’

The answer, of course, is personal transformation combined with social transformation. That joins the friendliness and cooperation of the small town with the convenience of the big city. How can this be accomplished? Through a balance between ‘church’ and ‘state.’ Let us turn our attention now to this thorny issue. But first, a brief digression.

A Brief Digression

This book follows many trains of thought. Occasionally, we need to jump from one track to another. We are about to hop, briefly, to two paths which were followed before. If I don’t make these digressions, then I risk being accused of incompleteness. However, if you are a linear thinker, then I suggest that you skip the following paragraphs and go directly to the next section. You can always come back and read this material later.

Our first digression compares the four requirements for the birth of science with the three requirements for the development of civilization that were described earlier. Notice that the first requirement of shaky idols is needed both for science and for civilization. In each case, Mercy importance has to be disabled. Second, Perceiver thought must also be encouraged in both situations. The arena for Perceiver thinking, though, is different. In a growing society, Perceiver strategy must survive the rough-and-tumble of interpersonal interactions. This can be achieved if the society consists of several groups of people that are different yet related. This same-but-different aspect forces individuals to gain mental stability by using Perceiver thought to compare and contrast between the various sub-groups within their society. Science, in contrast, requires Perceiver confidence within the esoteric realm of words and ideas. For science to develop, learning and instruction must lead in some way to Perceiver logic—we saw that this can happen either through natural ‘philosophy’ or through revealed 'truth.'

That brings us to the remaining requirements for encouraging societal and intellectual growth in a culture governed by emotional 'truth.' Society works with practical thought—a world of Mercy experiences and Server actions. What ties Mercy and Server strategies together? Perceiver facts. Notice that the first societal requirement frees Perceiver thought from Mercy interference, whereas the second uses Perceiver thought to connect Mercy experiences. I suggest that the third and final societal requirement of ‘limited warfare’ is also related to Perceiver thought. What is warfare? It is Server action taken to the extreme. Each side uses forcible action to overcome any and all Perceiver facts, rules, or barriers established by the other side. Thus, restricting the use of force—the third requirement for societal growth—prevents Server actions from overruling Perceiver facts.

Now let us turn our attention to the last two requirements for intellectual growth. Here too, I suggest that Perceiver thought plays a critical role. However, the function which Perceiver thought performs in intellectual thought is different than the role it plays in practical thought. Instead of linking Mercy experiences with Server actions, Perceiver facts act as a glue that binds together Server sequences and Teacher theories. Thus, both Teacher and Server memories have to be in a form that allows them to be connected by Perceiver links. Hence the last two requirements for science.

Oh, by the way, and this is a digression within a digression, notice that society and science themselves can be categorized by MBTI®. Society involves mainly Sensing. Thus, when we examine the growth of a society, we are looking primarily at the realm of Sensing. Science, in contrast, emphasizes iNtuition. Studying the birth of science, therefore, means focusing upon iNtuitive thought.

A growing society, though, will naturally extend into iNtuition, as institutions and ruling bodies are formed which go beyond the individual and his Sensing world. Similarly, science can lead to technology, which is iNtuition applied to the world of Sensing. Thus we have wheels within wheels. Or, to use a term introduced in the first volume, mental processing is fractal. The same principles operate at many different levels.

That leaves us with one more digression. What about the four assumptions of science? Remember them? How do they relate to our present discussion? Let us compare these four assumptions with the four requirements which we have just examined. The first assumption of science is that Perceiver thought can observe the world and come up with solid facts. This corresponds to the requirement of shaky idols. This is because Perceiver thought can only wake up and begin to think for itself to the extent that it becomes free of Mercy mesmerism. But why exactly are shaky idols and observation related? Because, observation is a positive way of both causing and responding to shaky idols. As we have discussed before, observing the natural order of the external world teaches Perceiver thought principles of common sense. On the one hand, an external source of facts helps Perceiver strategy to wake up fromemotionally induced mesmerism. On the other hand, common sense based in observation provides Perceiver thought with an alternative set of facts to replace the ones provided by Mercy mesmerism.

Similarly, I suggest that the second assumption of science—that cause and effectshould be the object of observation—corresponds to the second requirement for intellectual growth—that Perceiver strategy should fill the void left by shaky idols. Suppose that observation contents itself with studyingstatic objects and events. This approach, I suggest, will end up supporting idolatry. This is because idols, by nature, are static. Mercy strategy becomes emotionally attached to some specific Mercy memory and insists that this defining experience be preserved unchanged forever. These mental fixations can only become dislodged by filling Perceiver thought with solid facts that describe change. These Perceiver beliefs will then build connections between one static Mercy idol and another. Just as provincial thinking can be broadened by building roads between isolated communities, so this mental relinking has the power to digest Mercy fixations. Fortunately, when we examine the external world, we find that while objects come and go, natural process remains the same.

The third assumption of science is that Teacher strategy can find Teacher order within the principles of cause and effect discovered by Perceiver-guided observation. But, where does scientific observation find these Perceiver principles? In the concrete world of Sensing. Thus, the theorizing of science takes information from Sensing and uses Perceiver thought to shape it into a form that can be digested by iNtuition—the mindset that drives theorizing. This corresponds to the third requirement for propelling intellectual growth.

Finally, science assumes that its Teacher-based hypotheses can be generalized to explain other natural processes, and applied through technology to build real, working devices. Here we find the flip side of the previous assumption. Not only does science assume that Sensing can lead to iNtuition, but it also assumes that iNtuition can be applied in Sensing. This corresponds to the fourth requirement for intellectual growth.

Science emerges by accident when the four assumptions are met.

Research in some field become scientific when the four requirements are met.

So, why do I make a distinction between four assumptions and four requirements? Because of the nature of an assumption. Science didn’t decide to invent itself. Instead, it happened to approach the right subject with the appropriate mindset. Because logically based observation of natural process gave birth to science which transformed the world through technology, science assumes that it can extend its success to other areas of study. But, the natural world contains unique characteristics that do not appear in the realm of people, society, religion, and thought. For some reason, the natural world combines fixed process with moveable objects.[QQQQ] However, suppose that we really want to extend scientific thought. Then, assumptions must be replaced with requirements. Implicit mental structure must be made explicit.

All clear? I hope so, because we are about to discuss the heavy topic of church and state. This will give us the tools that we need to analyze the birth of science.

Church and State

Let us begin by reminding ourselves of the big picture. We started with a society in which emotional 'truth' ruled. We discovered that science and technology could develop in such an environment. We then realized that if science was to emerge, people first needed to learn how to use Perceiver logic. These thinking skills could be acquired in one of two ways: Either common sense could be developed by interacting with the external world, or else logical analysis could be perfected through the study of revealed 'truth.' In essence, both of these methods were ‘schools’ which taught their ‘students’ how to think. There was the school of life, and there was the school of books.[RRRR]

So, once science is birthed, then we can forget about our two schools and move on to bigger and better things, right? Wrong. What happens is that both schools develop a life of their own and continue to grow and interact with scientific thought, both before and after it comes into existence. What type of ‘living schools’ emerge? Let us use logic to work this out.

We will look first at the path of common sense. We all know that the external world imposes consequences upon actions. If I jump off a cliff, for instance, then my body goes ‘splat.’ As Perceiver strategy wakes up from its childhood hypnosis, it realizes that you really do reap what you sow. The result is common sense—a mental collection of Perceiver facts describing external cause and effect.

Perceiver strategy that is aware of common sense may be awake, but it is still passive. It is responding to external events.[SSSS] The next step is for Perceiver thought to become active. How does it become active? By establishing facts. What type of facts will it form? Principles of natural cause and effect.

We have just described the founding of a state. It emerges when people decide that they can create their own principles of natural cause and effect. But, how can they change cause and effect? By introducing artificial consequences. Before, the results came from the natural world: “Jump off the cliff and the rocks at the bottom will punish you.” Now they come also from people: “Take your neighbor’s food and the guards will beat you.”

A state emerges when people actively set up systems of external cause and effect.

·    They learn about cause and effect by passively observing nature.

Notice the difference between a state and a tribe. In a tribal system, Mercy importance rules: If you offend a leader, then he or his minions will attack you. In a state, Perceiver rules are in charge: Break a rule and you will be punished. Thus, a state can only develop if Perceiver strategy in its citizens is already programmed with principles of natural cause and effect. In other words, people can only use Perceiver rules to govern their external environment if they learn that Perceiver rules do govern their external environment.[TTTT]

Why a state? Why impose rules as a group? Because there is no other way to impose rules. Perceiver truth, by definition, builds solid connections between many different Mercy situations. Thus, Perceiver strategy can only believe in artificial rules if they apply to manydifferent individual people.

But what gives people the license to make up their own rules? Nothing. They do it because it matches their existing mindset. Perceiver logic has emerged from a background of Mercy importance; the grain of common sense has grown amidst the thorns of superstition. Therefore, it makes sense for people to use their own Mercy importance to grow their own Perceiver rules.

Now that we have discussed common sense, let us examine the kinds of external structures that develop from revealed 'truth.' As I have mentioned before, books assume Perceiver content. In order to read a book, Perceiver strategy must know enough to assign fixed meanings to each word. Literacy, in and of itself, therefore involves passive Perceiver confidence. The student reads words and Perceiver strategy believes that it knows the meanings of those words.

 But what is a Perceiver belief? According to Perceiver thought, beliefs are universal facts which apply within all situations and to all people. And what is the source of beliefs for a person who learns revealed 'truth'? A book with great emotional importance.

Remember also that Perceiver facts are not independent entities. Rather, they are connections between Mercy experiences. Therefore, when Perceiver strategy believes in certain truths, this will create imaginary images in Mercy thought. And, we know that Mercy strategy interprets life in personal terms.

Let us put the pieces together. First, Perceiver strategy in the student of revealed 'truth' believes in universal principles which were acquired from the words of a book. Second, Mercy strategy feels that the book, its words, its beliefs, and the images that were created by these beliefs are more important than all other Mercy experiences or memories.[UUUU] Third, all of this is given a personal flavor by Mercy strategy.

A church emerges when people actively spread a system of 'belief.'

·    They learn about 'belief' by passively studying the words of a book.

What we have just described is a religious system of belief. It is based in words, these words are believed, and these beliefs form internal images. All of this is wrapped up in Mercy importance.[VVVV]

All that is needed to turn this mindset into ‘church’ is some active Perceiver confidence. Perceiver thought believes that truth applies to all situations. Therefore, the religious adherent becomes a 'believer' who chooses to believe truth in the situations of daily life. These beliefs come from the words of a book, so the 'believer' will attempt to increase his 'faith' by studying the book. Perceiver beliefs build internal Mercy images and these pictures acquire emotional importance because they come from words rooted in emotional significance. Thus, the 'believer' tries to increase his religious fervor by learning more truth. Mercy strategy interprets memories in personal terms. Therefore, the 'believer' puts 'faith' in an invisible God.

But, Perceiver thought also believes that truth applies to all people. Therefore, the religious believer concludes that others should believe in his truth. And how will the believer spread his beliefs? Through words, because his own beliefs came from words. Thus he will talk, preach, teach, and hand out copies of his book in order to gain converts. How will he know if someone is a convert? Through the presence of internal Mercy images. If a listener chooses to believe the facts, then this will build an internal Mercy image within his mind. And how can the missionary discern that the new convert gives sufficient emotional respect to the source of the Holy Book? Through Exhorter attraction. If the religious words, beliefs and images have sufficient emotional strength, then the mind of the convert will be drawn to them, and he will want to spend time exploring them. And what is the final sign that this mental belief structure is in place? A faith in an invisible, personal God. Why invisible? Because the Mercy images are internal. Why personal? Because Mercy strategy interprets everything in personal terms. Why God? Because the Mercy images are rooted in Perceiver facts which go beyond specific Mercy experiences and people, and these facts are associated with words organized into the general system of a book, and this book is external and pre-existing.

But why ‘church’? Why the meetings and the buildings? Because we are looking at a system that mixes Mercy importance with Perceiver confidence. Since revealed 'truth' has its source in the Mercy importance of a ‘Holy Book’ object, the tendency will be to support the Holy Book with emotional rituals, buildings, and events. And, because the believers share a common emotional set of values, this emotional solidarity will be supported by giving respect to common rituals, buildings and events. Thus, for instance, if everyone attends a church on Sunday Morning, Protestant believers will feel that their 'faith' is being vindicated. 

And what will one do in these buildings at these meetings during these times? Study the book, listen to words about the book, and focus upon the internal Mercy images produced by a belief in these words.[WWWW]

A Balance of Power

So, are church and state good or bad? Let us answer that question in functional terms. We are examining the development of scientific thought.[XXXX] Science can only emerge if people know how to use Perceiver logic. Two ‘schools’ that can teach logical thinking are revealed 'truth' and common sense. As a byproduct, the first leads naturally to church and the second to state. Do church and state help or hinder the process of developing logic and science? That, I suggest, is the crucial question.

Let us suppose that a society contains both church and state.[YYYY] What is the mentaleffect of this combination? On the one hand, the church uses Mercy status to teach a certain set of 'facts' as absolute 'truth.' Thus, it relates to the me of Mercy identification. What is produced by combining Perceiver belief with emotional Mercy absolutes? Conscience. Therefore, the church will program conscience in its followers. This will give it emotional power over the internal world of individuals.[ZZZZ]

On the other hand, there is the state. It uses physical force to impose a set of Perceiver rules upon its citizens. If you are ‘bad,’ the state will punish your physical body, or imprison you within a rotten physical environment. If you are ‘good,’ it will help your body, or improve your physical surroundings. Thus, it influences the me of the physical body.

A church controls 'believers' through the weapon of conscience.

A state uses physical force to control its citizens.

Can the church force people to 'believe'? No, because force belongs to the state, which controls the me of the physical body. Therefore, the church, as an institution, can only control individuals by appealing to their me of Mercy identification. How can it do this most effectively? Is it by using idols and filling Mercy strategy with defining experiences? No. First, idols are unstable. The influence of an idol-worshipping church extends only as far as the church door, at which point it is countered by idols outside the church. Second, idols are physical objects. If the state controls the me of the physical body, than it can always out-idol the church.

The other option is for the church to add Perceiver confidence to Mercy absolutes. As we know, Perceiver belief gives stability to internal Mercy images. Perceiver confidence, properly exploited, can allow the church to retain its influence even when a believer leaves a church building. And, because this method influences the me of Mercy identification, the church will have an advantage over the state. In other words, the church is most effective with moral authority—in which it programs conscience. A church without moral authority very quickly loses its significance.

We see therefore, that if a church is limited by the state, then it can only survive by building Perceiver confidence in its followers. Notice that we have again arrived at the conclusion that revealed 'truth,' if it wants to continue, must allow its students to graduate. Otherwise, it is doomed.

Let us turn our attention now to the state. I suggest that its power, too, is limited. Yes, it can imprison its citizens and torture their physical bodies. But, all of its actions are subject to the scrutiny of an independent conscience. Why? Because the church teaches believers to use Perceiver confidence in the midst of Mercy emotions, and these believers will use logic to evaluate the emotional consequences of the state’s edicts.

Now, suppose that the state increases the level of force that it uses to impose its demands upon the population. By exalting force, it creates Mercy importance that attacks Perceiver logic. Therefore, people will lose the ability to think rationally. On the one hand, this ensures that government edicts will increasingly lack common sense. On the other hand, church believers, even in their intimidated state, will eventually notice this discrepancy and decide to follow conscience instead of the state, thus undermining the power of the state. Eventually, as history shows, the state will be forced to capitulate.

A church maximizes its power by teaching Perceiver confidence.

A state maximizes its power by enforcing common sense.

The other alternative is for the state to choose to impose rules that follow common sense. If government edicts are in line with natural cause and effect, then its citizens will usually be willing to obey them. We see this illustrated in today’s Western democracies. The power that they have over their people is immense, far exceeding the might of any absolute monarch in the past. Endless volumes of rules and regulations reach everywhere in order to control and limit our lives. We cannot escape this long arm of government, no matter where we go or what we do. And yet, most of us still feel that we live in a free society. Why? Because government laws generally line up with common sense.

Thus, we conclude that both church and state can maximize their influence by promoting Perceiver confidence and logic in their respective followers. Therefore, if there is a balance of power between church and state, then both will naturally act as teachers that encourage their respective and common students to develop Perceiver thinking.

But, what if church and state become one entity? Suppose that either the church acquires secular power, the state establishes its own religion, or else that they join forces and the state reinforces the church’s beliefs while the church preaches state doctrine. What happens then? In essence, the internal and the external worlds become joined together through an external structure. Remember that the church governs the internal world through conscience. In contrast, the state uses force to control the external world. Suppose that a single external organization becomes both church and state? What we have then is a bridging of the MBTI® I/E split. And how is this split bridged? Externally.[AAAAA] We discussed this combination before and suggested that it signaled the beginning of a fascist dictatorship. I think that we can conclude fairly quickly that we do not want to live through another Nazi Germany—or a Third World War.

Church versus State

As it turns out, both church and state naturally invade each other’s turf, and a balance of power is therefore not always easy to maintain. Let us look first at how this extension develops within the church world. It begins as a system of teaching, preaching, study, and worship. This causes two additional elements to enter. First, church acquires external property. Why? Because it needs places of worship, teaching centers, preaching auditoriums and study halls. Its domain thus begins to extend from the me of Mercy identification to the me of the physical body, because church property is physical matter which interacts with the physical body.

Second, church develops hierarchy. Why? Because all this property and organization is too much for one person to handle. Therefore, some people become more in charge than others.[BBBBB] The core elements of a church ‘state’ are now in place. Leaders are telling others what to do, and their control of physical property gives them external carrots and sticks with which they can enforce their demands.[CCCCC]

Let us look now at the growth of the state. It starts out as a collection of artificial rules. But, how can the average citizen learn about laws of the land? He cannot study them by observing natural cause and effect, because these new rules are all man-made. He could learn by being punished whenever he violated a government edict, but who wants to live under the constant threat of being arrested for some infraction? Obviously, the people expect the government to tell them about its new rules, and the citizens will also want everything put down on paper, so that there is a written record of exactly what the current rules are.

The state at this point, however, is infringing upon the territory of the church, because it now has its own written revealed 'truth,' rooted in the emotional importance of the state.

Now suppose that the rules and regulations breed and multiply, as they inevitably do.[DDDDD] Eventually, the typical citizen will no longer be able to remember them all. It is then necessary to set up schools that teach government laws, staffed by experts who devote their lives to a study of man-made regulations. Put in these terms, such a practice sounds rather absurd. I am referring, of course, to law schools and lawyers, who form one of today’s most lucrative professions. In our modern society, not even a lawyer can know all the laws; he must specialize in some narrow subset of artificial rules. Imagine spending your whole life memorizing and manipulating peoples’ opinions.

State and church naturally invades each others’ territory.

·    State creates laws which are studied by lawyers and revealed to citizens.

·    Church develops hierarchy and acquires physical property.

Notice that the state with its extensive legal system has developed all of the major elements of a church. It has its own books of revealed 'truth' which program conscience through study, teaching, and reading, its own full-time clergy inhabiting temples of higher learning, and its own rituals performed by the clergy on behalf of the laity.[EEEEE]

Put these various factors together and you end up with inevitable, growing conflict between church and state. Each infringes upon the territory of the other, and each views the other as an illegitimate invader.

Oh, by the way, do you now see why I suggested that education is by nature religious? Revealed 'truth' has implicit religious overtones and leads naturally to a church system. And, a church will set up schools and teach others. Historically, most educational systems have been run by the local religious institutions and most Western universities were founded by religious groups. Globally, missionaries—of various religions—have probably done more to spread literacy than anyone else.

If the state grows its own clergy and its own 'truth,' then one could see why the state would also want to control education. But, when the state begins to teach, then it is stepping into the province of the church. In fact, I suggest that state education is one major sign that the state is taking over the function of the church. Why is this significant? Because the thing that protects society from dictatorship is the balance of power between state and church. When one displaces the other, then that is a sure sign that a fascist society is around the corner.

Let me give you some recent North American examples and we will see what they say about the current relationship between church and state. A few years ago, the United States banned prayer from its public schools. Education, I have suggested, began with the church. Prayer, we all know, is an aspect of church.[FFFFF] Therefore, when the state bans prayer in schools, this indicates a final step in taking over the schools from the church. Today’s victory of state over church is so complete that the American state feels justified in removing all educational references to the church. In fact, today, religion is generally a taboo subject in most North American schools.[GGGGG]

But why should students be forced to pray in school? Besides, what about all of the other religions? Such questions are irrelevant. The point is that the North American balance between church and state has become unhinged. State has expelled church. Whenever this happens, then fascism is imminent. If you don’t believe me, then examine Germany history from the 1930s. The Nazis succeeded in large measure because the German church did not protest. Physical intimidation by the goose-stepping Nazi brown shirts and black shirts suppressed all dissenting voices of conscience. The Nazis then replaced the German church with their own brand of pagan rune-based religion.

The current North American interpretation of the separation of church and state indicates a similar attitude. Initially, the United States instituted this distinction in order to avoid the state churches of Europe. By keeping church and state separate, Americans achieved a level of personal freedom which did not exist at that time in the ‘old country.’

The separation of church and state is now defined to be a separation of church from state.[HHHHH] Thus, whenever the church imposes conscience upon the population, the state steps in and declares that the church is breaking the law. But, how doesa church operate? Through conscience. Again we see a victory of state over church which is so complete that the state feels justified in removing all tracesof church influence. But, if the church is prevented from being the conscience of society, who or what will limit the power of the state? As the saying goes, power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.[IIIII]

separation of church and state naturally restricts the power of the church.

·    Church operates through conscience, which is formed through connections.

But doesn’t the state have its own clergy and its own revealed 'truth'? Why can’t lawyers be the conscience of society? Let me answer that question with two more. Are lawyers generally known to be honest? Do they respect their conscience? Also, what is the bottom line for a lawyer? If his primary duty is to discover and present the facts of a case, then he may claim to be a source of conscience. But, if his primary goal is to support and protect his client, then Mercy importance has taken over from Perceiver confidence. When this happens, then the conscience of the state has rejected the very concept of conscience and is motivated solely by a desire to prevent the state from imposing physical force.[JJJJJ]

In addition, what happens when someone makes a public moral statement that makes another person feel guilty or condemned? Often, he is sued—for millions of dollars. Thus, the state uses its artificial ‘clergy’ to destroy the function of the church. The end result is a new ‘church,’ based in the state and supported by the state.

State without Church

So, how did such a situation arise? I suggest that this imbalance is a natural result of pursuing social transformation—to the exclusion of personal transformation. Let me explain. Social transformation uses groups of people to produce external change. It uses Perceiver logic to analyze the external world, and it integrates iNtuition and Sensing through the use of science and technology.

Let us analyze the effect that this has upon state and church. On the one hand, the state is supercharged, for the success of science and technology encourages people to apply Perceiver logic to the external world. Citizens develop a mindset that expects the state, which rules the external, to come up with rules to guide their external behavior. The state, in turn, finds that scientific discoveries provide a never-ending source for potential laws. And, technology gives the state the ability to impose this multiplicity of laws upon its citizens. Finally, because science and technology are growing and progressing, people find it reasonable that other externally based institutions, such as the state, should grow as well. Finally, all of this activity is driven by Teacher emotion which feels that everything should be bigger, better, more integrated and more structured. The end result is a monstrous state that overshadows and governs everything and everyone.

Science and technology supercharge the state and hobble the church.

On the other hand, under social transformation the church finds itself fighting a losing battle. As I have mentioned before, social transformation discourages people from following personal transformation—a topic which should be the specialty of the church. Because of this unpopularity, only a few individuals manage to graduate formallyfrom the school of revealed 'truth.' As a result, church becomes filled with students unable to move beyond blind 'faith.' Religious understanding then gives way to idolatry and fundamentalism. Meanwhile, science introduces Perceiver logic into more and more areas, causing individuals to doubt all 'truth' rooted in emotional importance, including the revealed 'truth' of church.

This puts the church into an indefensible position. If it tries to defend its 'truth,' then its emphasis on Mercy importance merely causes it to sink further into idolatry and ultimately become just another Mercy-based special interest group. On the other hand, if it uses science and technology to spread its message, this sends its listeners the non-verbal message that all real power comes from technology, science, and thus, the state.[KKKKK]

This war between church and state will be marked by several key battles. First, at some point the church will officially abandon Perceiver logic and cling to Mercy importance. It will declare that 'truth' must be acquired emotionally and that God cannot be understood logically. This will have the short-termeffect of relieving the pressure upon the church. By retreating to subjective feeling, the church will no longer be attacked by the objective thinking of science. However, the long-term result will be to make it almost impossible for anyone to graduate from revealed 'truth.' This will make personal transformation very difficult,[LLLLL] because the very institution which teaches that Perceiver truth applies to Mercy feelings is now stating that the resulting Mercy experiences can never be touched by Perceiver logic.

Revealed 'truth' can stop being attacked by objective science by declaring 'faith' to be irrational.

·    This defense makes it impossible for 'believers' to graduate from revealed 'truth.'

In other words, the very group which is supposed to help individuals integrate Thinking and Feeling now declares that they are unbridgeable. Like the proverbial ‘dog in the manger,’ the mystical church will be unable to digest its 'truth,' while at the same time growling at all others who do attempt to come and eat.

Another key struggle will involve control over education. We have seen earlier that education begins with the church. If the state continues to grow and the church keeps on shrinking, then eventually the state will take over the schools, as we have seen it do in our day—and citizens will find thisreasonable. Victory will be followed by a long-term cleansing of school curriculum. Slowly but surely, religious references will be eliminated from teaching. Eventually, education will become completely secularized. Once this stage has been reached, then the church will lose its ability to instill conscience in theaverage citizen. Church, and its teaching, will then turn into a fringe element, regarded by most people as unreasonable.[MMMMM]

The victory of state over church will lead in turn to a major shift in peoples’ view of Deity. At some point in time, the general public will officially repudiate the ‘God’ of church, and replace it with a new non-religious image of the Divine. What type of image will emerge? First, this ‘God’ will be impersonal, because it comes from objective science and technology. Second, this ‘God’ will be a ‘God’ of progress, since science and technology continue to grow. Third, this ‘God’ will deal with the group rather than with the individual, because people are being influenced by societal transformation. Finally, this ‘God’ will change people through external means, since societal transformation changes the external world. So, tell me, do our schools teach about an impersonal ‘God’ that uses external means to bring progress to groups of individuals? Yes. This ‘God’ is based upon the theory of evolution.

Objective science and technology lead naturally to the ‘God’ of evolution.

·    This ‘God’ is impersonal and works with groups of people.

·    ‘It’ operates externally through the hand of ‘Nature.’

·    ‘It’ is a ‘God’ of progress combined with obsolescence.

People 'know' this ‘God’ is true because they live in a world of objective technology.

“But evolution is not a religion.” Oh? Just trying discussing alternative theories and see what type of response you get. “And, evolution doesn’t produce an image of ‘God.’” Really? The abilities that are attributed to the all-powerful hand of Nature seem mighty divine to me. “Besides, evolution isn’t against organized religion.” Oh? The zeal with which 'believers' in evolution defend their 'faith' and squelch dissenting voices borders upon religious fanaticism. “But, evolution is not a blind 'faith.'” Really? Tell, me, have you ever seen evolution at work? I mean, real evolution, in which a cat turns into a dog, or a fish into a bird.

“Oh, I see. You are really a closet creationist. If you believe in special creation, then this proves that you are not a real scientist. So much for your so-called research.”[NNNNN] Ah. First, I suggest that a statement such as this shows that seculareducation is not an independent entity, but rather that it is emotionally parasitic upon the religious belief which it is suppressing. Second, it demonstrates that evolution really is an exclusive, fundamentalist religion, which condemns competing beliefs as heretical and evil. In other words, it is based in Mercy importance, and not Teacher generality. A Teacher-based theory tries to swallow up other systems by explaining them. In contrast, a Mercy-based theory attacks the enemy and belittles and destroys the competition.

“But, who cares about ‘God’ and religion? Besides, we all know that religion has no place in education, right? After all, the world contains many different religions, each with its own Holy Book. Secular thinking has cleansed education from this fanatical influence. Are we really supposed to take one of these volumes and impose it upon the general population?”

Such questions, I suggest, reflect the type of response that emerges when science and technology lift up the state and suppress the church. The point is that in the past, all education was religious. Teachers did exalt one Holy Book and impose it upon their students to the exclusion of all other sources of 'truth.' Since then, the success of science and technology has prompted most countries to go through a major shift from church to state.

You see, Western education still is religious. All that has changed is our Holy Book. Now, we teach the state religion of evolution and social progress.[OOOOO] Whatever conforms to this new religion is currently accepted as orthodox.[PPPPP]

So, is this shift good or bad? Well, if one wants to avoid a state dictatorship, then state-sponsored religion is bad. But, remember that state and church are themselves aberrations. The real goal is to reach mental wholeness by integrating the MBTI® splits. Social transformation begins with S/N and leads to science and technology. Personal transformation, in contrast, starts with T/F and leads to… Well, where does it lead? We don’t know, because this path has never yet been fully explored. Some have walked part of the way, but I suggest that no one has yet arrived at the destination.

In other words, life is more than church and state. Eventually, both of these will be rendered obsolete and they will be replaced. In fact, I suggest that this process is already underway. How will it happen? We will examine this further in a few pages, but let us first step back a few centuries and look at the birth of science. If you remember, that was our original topic, before we detoured into a discussion of church and state. Come to think of it, wasn’t that the original aim of society, before it became obsessed with church and state?

Science and History

Our look at history will take three different snapshots of the past. First, we will look at two periods when science could have emerged but didn’t, because all four requirements were not present in full force.[QQQQQ] Then, we will look at the period when science actually did come into being. Our discussion will also illustrate the historical role that has been played by church and state.

The Greeks and the Jews

Our first illustration is that of the Greek civilization. The Greeks, I suggest, are one of the prime examples of pre-scientific thought developing through the path of common sense and the me of the physical body. Let us see whether Greek thought fulfilled the four requirements for the birth of true science.

 The Greeks definitely met the first requirement of weakened Mercy importance. Greek deities—their icons of Mercy significance—were constantly squabbling with one another and vying for status. These gods were placed upon ‘pedestals’ that barely raised them above the level of the people around them. At best, they were supermen with super problems.

Second, the physical geography of Greece forced the Greeks to learn common sense. As the saying goes, necessity is the mother of invention. The land was so barren that the Greeks had to improvise or starve. The Greeks themselves described a connection between personality and geography: Those who lived within the fertile valley of Boeotia were known for their stolid, unimaginative character. In contrast, Athens inherited the most inhospitable terrain and eventually became the leading city.[RRRRR]

Not only did the land of Greece require common sense, but it also encouraged it. The numerous inlets ensured that almost every location was close to the sea. As a result, the fastest and easiest way of getting from Point A to Point B was by ship, and the building of boats requires a certain level of technology.

The last two factors were also present. First, Greek iNtuition was filled with a pantheon of gods, each with his own Teacher domain. These gods, however, were totally compatible with the Sensing world of physical bodies and matter, and supposedly came down occasionally to act within the mortal world of humans. Therefore Greek iNtuition stretched to include Sensing.

Second, the Greeks were the founders of natural philosophy, which struggles to come up with abstract theories that explain the sensory environment. In other words, Greek Sensing expanded to include iNtuition.

The Greeks could have developed science through the path of common sense.

·    They fulfilled the four requirements for science.

·    Along with each requirement was a roadblock that halted progress.

So what went wrong? Why was science stillborn? All the requirements were met, weren’t they? Yes. But, I suggest that each of the four prerequisites was accompanied by a barrier that blocked the road of intellectual progress.[SSSSS] Let us look at these four roadblocks, each one corresponding to one of the four requirements.

First, emotional pressure was never very far away. This is graphically illustrated by the death of Socrates. He was the first philosopher to actively proclaim the supremacy of Perceiver logic, and he delighted in pointing out the logical shortcomings of his neighbors. Eventually, the authorities got tired of his accusations and decided to get rid of the message by silencing the messenger. Socrates chose to die by drinking poison rather than abandon his role as the conscience of his society.

Second, while the death of Socrates did prompt Plato to pursue Perceiver logic, this rational thinking was limited in both extent and duration. Plato used logic, but he was still thinking in terms of imposed 'truth.' For him, the ideal was the philosopher king, who defined ‘right’ and ‘wrong’ by decree. And, within a few generations, Plato’s followers had abandoned logic for consensus, eventually turning as we saw into Buddhist philosophers, before being dislodged by the advent of Christianity.

As for the last two requirements, I suggest again that slavery made it impossible for the Greeks to integrate Sensing and iNtuition. On the one hand, manual labor was delegated to slaves, and slaves were not supposed to think. A slave was not a citizen, and therefore his words and ideas could ultimately be disregarded. On the other hand, only a ‘man of leisure’ could become a philosopher. Thus, those who acted, didn’t think, and those who thought, didn’t act. It is somewhat ironic that the Greeks were unable to discover the benefits of machine tools because they never let go of their human ‘tools.’

The Greeks acquired their rational thinking through the path of natural philosophy. The society that provides our second example, in contrast, developed logic by analyzing the words of a Holy Book. I am referring, of course, to the ultimate ‘people of the Book’—the Jews. No other society has preserved a Holy Book with as much care, accuracy and dedication.

It is hard to associate Jewish society with the concept of ‘shaky idols,’ but I suggest that this was exactly the situation in Israel around 200 BC. Judaism at that time was under assault by a flood of Greek culture. By about 175 BC, even the high priests in Jerusalem fell under the sway of Hellenization, and Jerusalem was declared to be a Greek city. It is quite possible that Judaism survived only because the Syrian king antagonized the Jewish population by blaspheming the temple in Jerusalem.

Religious corruption and confusion extended to the highest levels of Jewish religion. High priests were not only religious leaders but also the wealthiest individuals, with the greatest political power. They operated the temple as a kind of bank where money was stored.

Did any Perceiver thought fill the hole left vacant by wobbling culture? Let me, in typical Jewish fashion, answer this with another question. Has anyone heard of the term ‘talmudic logic’? How did the Jews respond when their country was captured, their temple destroyed, and their entire upper class deported to Babylon?[TTTTT] They transformed the Jewish religion into an intellectual pursuit, and gathered in synagogues to discuss religious topics. Eventually those thoughts were complied into the encyclopedia known as the Talmud.[UUUUU] It is filled with doctrinal logic.

So far, so good. Let us move now to the relationship between Sensing and iNtuition, between Server and Teacher strategies. The Jewish people have always been known for their rituals. Their Torah contains a detailed schedule of activities, procedures, and annual festivals. In other words, Sensing and Server actions are there in abundance. What guides these actions?

In order to answer this question, we need to review the exact nature of an MBTI® split. In essence, it replaces mental interaction with an external division of labor. Instead of developing an internal connection between modes of thought, people limit their thinking to one side of the split and then look to other people to provide what is lacking. Therefore, applying this to iNtuition and Sensing, whenever we see an external specialization between management and labor—between talking and doing, then we know that the N/S split is present. In contrast, if people instruct themselves, then we can conclude that there is an internal relationship between Sensing and iNtuition, and that the split has been resolved.

In the case of the Jews, we find three factors that forced Sensing to be guided by internal iNtuition. First, their instructions came from the pages of a Holy Book, and not from the words of living leaders. Second, there was a legislated separation between priest and king—a personalized version of the distinction between church and state—commanded by the words of the Jewish Holy Book. Therefore, their religious leaders did not have the power to dictateinstructions to their followers. This external vacuum forced the relationship between Sensing and iNtuition to become internalized. Third, Jewish law introduced the Sabbath, in which all Sensing activity was prohibited during one day of the week. Like telling a child to go sit in the corner and think, such regular forced inactivity would have strongly encouraged personal intellectual thought.[VVVVV]

So, how does this relate to the last two requirements for science? Were they present in Jewish society? We have already seen that their Sensing world was rationally organized by iNtuition. Was the other direction also present? Did Jewish iNtuition extend to the physical realm of Sensing?

What was the major source of Jewish iNtuition? Their Holy Book. So, what does it have to say about Sensing? Well, most of this book is a chronicle of the history of the Jewish people and how it was ‘manipulated’ by God. In other words, it describes a God of iNtuition[WWWWW] who affects the real world of Sensing.

With all of these factors present, surely science must have emerged. Well, it could have, but it didn’t. This is because, like the Greeks, the progress of the Jews was also halted by mental roadblocks—handicaps which, I suggest, are still partially present today. Therefore, my comments may offend. So, what’s new?

The Jews could have developed science through the path of revealed 'truth.'

·    They also fulfilled the four requirements for science.

·    Each requirement was accompanied by a roadblock that halted progress.

First, there is the question of Jewishness. If I am born into a special race that is chosen by ‘God Himself,’ then this Mercy importance has the potential to overwhelm any and all Perceiver facts that try to condemn or to change me. After all, I am special, chosen, unique, unimpeachable. No 'facts' can ever threaten me.

Second, there is the issue of tradition. Whenever a group of people carries out a common set of rituals, the tendency is for approval to take control. Tradition may produce Perceiver rules that are stable and solid, but it definitely does not teach Perceiver logic.

Third, the Server actions of the Jews acted as mental blinders which prevented them from seeing and analyzing other sequences. Thus, their iNtuitive thought was limited to an analysis of Jewish culture and Sensing. All other Sensing was regarded as secondary and unworthy of analysis.

Finally, the Jews, by one simple act, prevented iNtuition from ever touching Sensing in a meaningful manner. How? We can use logic to work it out. If iNtuition uses words and if iNtuition is centered around a knowledge and analysis of God and religion, then what is the most effective way of ensuring that this image of God never affects the world of Sensing? By making sure that the verbal name for God never enters the realm of Sensing. How can one do this? By refusing to speak the name of God.

Down to this day, Jews will not say or read the word ‘Jahweh,’ and write G-d instead of God. This may prevent an image of ‘God’ from being ‘blasphemed’ by contact with ‘secular’ life, but it also perpetuates an S/N split.[XXXXX]

And yet, how was this name revealed to the Jewish people? According to their Scriptures, Moses saw a bush that burned but did not burn up. He turned aside to look, and God spoke to him and revealed ‘The Name.’ Thus, iNtuition revealed ‘The Name’ by directly interfering in the world of Sensing, and now this very same name is ‘protected’ by preventing it from ever touching the realm of Sensing.

Before we go on, I should point out that these same four roadblocks are also present to a large extent in Christendom—the supposed successor to Judaism. First, the ‘Christian’ version of the ‘chosen people’ exists within the doctrines of eternal security and predestination. These state that God has chosen me—and us—and that He will never, ever, reject me or my group. Second, Christianity has fallen easily into the traps of tradition and fundamentalism. In both cases, icy hands of Mercy importance have reached up and frozen any Perceiver logic that dares to analyze revelation. Third, the thinking of most Christians is also culturally bound. They are convinced that the only Server sequences and actions which matter are those connected with the established church, and that all secular actions are, at most, a commentary upon the march of religious progress. Finally, Christians may be very willing to say the word ‘God,’ but they generally rebel from any serious attempt to apply rational thought to the concept of God. As far as they are concerned, God resides within a part of invisible iNtuition which man can never touch with his rational thinking as long as he is bound to the external sensory world.[YYYYY]

Whenever and wherever Christians have held on to these roadblocks, I suggest that they also have been condemned to watch from the sidelines as all real progress occurs elsewhere. In essence, such Christians have locked themselves into a Jewish-style timewarp, two thousand years out of date.

We have looked at the history of the Greeks and the Jews and have seen that either of them could have developed science, hundreds of years before the birth of Christ. This raises the following question: Maybe the Greeks and the Jews were unable to birth science because they were isolated from one other. If only they had met and lived together, then surely science would have emerged. Unfortunately, they did, and it didn’t.

This intermingling of Jew and Greek occurred in the Egyptian city of Alexandria at the height of both Jewish and Greek readiness—between about 200 BC and 200 AD. Not only was this city a center of Greek learning, with its famous library of half a million volumes, but it also contained one of the largest concentration of Jews outside of Israel itself. It was here that the Septuagint was produced—a translation of the Tanach, the Jewish Holy Book, into the Greek language.

But why should living together make any difference? Because of the nature of social transformation. Remember that humans can only integrate Sensing and iNtuition by cooperating externally to build a civilization.[ZZZZZ] And, we are looking at the birth of science—the external integration of Sensing and iNtuition. Therefore, if religious, iNtuition-oriented Jews and secular, Sensing-based Greeks lived together within a single city, then surely this very coexistence would encourage them to take the corporate step of integrating Sensing with iNtuition.

Did science emerge? No. Greeks and Jews passed each other like two ships in the night. Their numerous roadblocks prevented meaningful communication.[AAAAAA] Then, the window of opportunity closed, and the two parties continued on their isolated ways—to corporate destruction. Greek thinking was swallowed up by Roman dictatorship, and the Jewish state was destroyed by Roman armies.

Jews and Greeks, living together in Alexandria, could have started science.

·    Niether side was able to break free of its bias and learn from the other side.

Before we move forward to the time when science was born, I would like to suggest that a similar situation exists today. In Alexandria, an opportunity for social transformation was lost. They could have transformed the me of the physical body through the discovery of science and technology. Similarly, I suggest that today we are in danger of missing a chance to rebuild the me of Mercy identification through personal transformation.

As I mentioned before, the Western church with its book of revealed 'truth' also feels, like the Jewish people two millenia ago, that it is being overwhelmed by a flood of rational culture and thought. Likewise, secular existence is so rattled by the pace of change that it is crying out for peace and quiet. In other words, idols on both sides of the divide are shaking.

Those in the Western Church who still respect their Holy Book generally think that they have a monopoly upon 'truth' and view secular learning at best as a way of propping up this revelation. Likewise, secular thinkers try to separate rational understanding from the real world of personal feelings. This means that modern Perceiver thought is split. Server thought is also divided, for religious 'believers' who accept conscience focus so heavily upon revealed morality that they are blinded to mental principles of cause and effect, and secular thinking is so busy either with games of personal status or with the goal of remaining ‘objective’ that it is in danger of limiting rational theories entirely to the arena of the non-personal.

Are we also going to be like two ships passing in the night? Will a deluge of irrationalism and dictatorship swallow us up just as the circuses and the Caesars of Rome inundated the Greeks and the Jews, or will we be able to make a transition to something better? We have looked at the type of emotional trauma that faces us, as a civilization, if we continue upon our present course. However, if we grasp the moment, then history suggests that an incredible breakthrough may be possible!!

The Birth of Science

Of course, we all know that, in our Western Civilization, science eventually did emerge. Why? Because both Greek and Jewish factors were simultaneously present. When two converging ships are heading along the same channel, they have no choice but to collide with one other. And in our civilization, the Greek and the Jewish streams of thought were literally bolted together—through the Enlightenment and the Reformation. Even today, we still acknowledge Greek learning as the source of our understanding and accept the Holy Book of Judaism as part of the revealed 'truth' for our major religion.[BBBBBB]

I should point out that science emerged only in the western half of the ex-Roman civilization. In the fourth century AD, the Roman empire was divided into two sections. The western part was ruled from Rome, whereas the eastern half had its capital in Constantinople. The west was overrun by barbarians whereas the east managed to survive until 1461 when Trebizond was finally conquered.[CCCCCC] For hundreds of years, the eastern half of the Roman empire was far more advanced than its poorer, semi-barbaric western cousin. And yet, science emerged in the west and not the east. Why? I suggest that Rome possessed one crucial element which Constantinople lacked—a separation between church and state. In the east, church and state were highly integrated. In contrast, the Roman church always had to contend with the power of surrounding secular kings. History shows that, eventually, the West discovered science, whereas the east bred the Orthodox church and was overcome eventually by Islam.[DDDDDD]

Let us look now at how the four requirements for science were met the second time around, both from the ‘Greek’ and from the ‘Jewish’ perspectives. If you remember, the first requirement is ‘shaky idols.’ History shows that Western Europe went through major political and religious upheaval during the time that science developed. Medieval thinking viewed Europe as a single religious and political entity, ruled from Rome by the Pope and the Holy Roman Emperor. However, by the fifteenth century, this unitary system had become seriously fragmented. Europe separated into individual nations, ruled by leaders who demanded political autonomy from Rome. Similarly, the Protestant reformers succeeded in rebelling from the Roman Church. Therefore, both political and religious idols were unstable.

Requirement #1: Shaky Mercy idols.

·    Western Europe experienced major religious and political upheaval when science emerged.

Other areas of life also experienced major upheaval. During the fourteenth century, the Black Death killed one third of the European population. All classes of society were profoundly affected as whole towns were wiped out by the plague. Add to this the Hundred Years War, the discovery of the new world, and the final collapse of the Byzantine Empire—the last vestige of the great Roman civilization, and you conclude that the people of the time must have felt as if they were experiencing a mental earthquake. Everything that had seemed solid until then was shaking.

The second requirement calls for the development of logical thinking. We joke about medieval scholars debating over the number of angels that can stand upon the head of a pin, but the point is that they were using logic to argue these issues.[EEEEEE] Similarly, Italian scholars of the day were usingrational thinking to study the newly rediscovered manuscripts of Greek wisdom. Therefore, when the idols of society began to sway, the natural impulse was to address these problems by applying logic.

Notice the indirect presence of both Greek and Jewish influence. The Greeks were present through their writings. Incidentally, it is very interesting to note how these manuscripts were transmitted. Most of the Greek works had been ‘lost’ to the West. However, copies had been preserved both in the Byzantium empire and in the Arab realm. These were eventually ‘rediscovered’ by the West, as intellectual traffic increased between these various domains. Some of the Greek writings, though, were never ‘lost.’ Boethius, a government minister of Theodoric, one of the last Roman emperors, translated many of Aristotle’s works into Latin. What did he translate? Mainly, Aristotle’s treatises on logic. Thus, he and others like him ensured that the West remembered primarily the logical side of Greek thinking. By the time the other manuscripts came to light, Western thinking was sufficiently rooted in logic for Perceiver confidence to survive the intellectual onslaught.

Requirement #2: Growing Perceiver logic.

·    Western scholasticism used logic to analyze the writings of the of the Greeks.

·    Christianity preserved the Holy Book of the Jews.

The Jewish influence also occurred indirectly, and again in a manner that emphasized Perceiver thought and downplayed Mercy importance. Christianity began, of course, as a Jewish offshoot. But what Jewish elements did it preserve? Mainly the revealed 'truth.' The JewishTanachbecame the Old Testament of Christianity. And what Jewish elements were rejected? The Jewish culture along with the concept of Jews being the chosen people. Thus, it was mainly the logical side of Judaism that was passed on. Meanwhile, Jews still lived in Europe as a diaspora. This had two effects. On the one hand, Christians were thwarted from claiming that they were God’s chosen people, because the original ‘chosen nation’ still lived among them, disproving such statements by its very presence. On the other hand, by being a diaspora, Jews were both encouraged and forced to survive by using Perceiver thought to develop their wits.[FFFFFF]

By the way, notice how these two historical streams coalesced respectively into church and state. Jewish 'belief' was the predecessor of the Western Church, whereas the Greek Civilization was the antecedent of the Western state.

That brings us to the two requirements involving Server and Teacher strategies. We will look at both the ‘Jewish’ and the ‘Greek’ side of Western society, see how they eventually connected together and how the previous roadblocks were removed.

First, the ‘Greek’ view of action and Sensing altered in the West because slavery and serfdom were much less prevalent than in either Greek or Roman society.[GGGGGG] Thus, those who acted were able to develop abstract thought. This can be seen in the formation of guilds, in which people with similar Server skillsformed Teacher motivated organizations based upon common Perceiver knowledge.[HHHHHH]

Second, there was the ‘Greek’ view of iNtuition. A state that separates iNtuition from Sensing will express this division as a split between government and people, between those who command and those who obey. This was bridged in the West by a unique form of governmental structure called Feudalism, which developed in response to several centuries of recurring Viking raids. Those in authority could not just sit around and cogitate; they had to be prepared continually to send military aid to wherever a Viking longboat showed up with its murderous crew. And the Vikings were not a predictable foe. In fact, for literally hundreds of years, most of Europe lived under the threat of surprise attack by a marauding force. This created a mindset based in action and not passivity. Feudalism, the result, was a contract between parties, withreciprocal rights and responsibilities. In other words, secular iNtuition expanded to include Sensing through a relationship that was based in solid Perceiver rules.

Western religion also had an entirely different view of iNtuition. Religious iNtuition was centered in monastic life. Here, men and women gathered to study, worship and meditate about God. One would think that such an environment would have promoted physical passivity. However, manual labor was also a major part of the monastic routine. In fact, the Benedictine order, one of the largest monastic groups, was founded in order to reintroduce private farming into Italy—replacing the great slave-driven plantations of the late Roman empire. Thus, religious iNtuition expanded to include Sensing. Within what type of environment? Within the strict solid Perceiver rules of a monastic life.[IIIIII]

Requirement #3: Sensing expands to include iNtuition.

·    Western society exalted Sensing through guilds instead of controlling Sensing through slavery.

·    Western religion was the source of education, and did not just perform Server rituals.

Requirement #4: iNtuition applies itself to Sensing.

·    Feudalism was a reciprocalarrangement in which leaders had to act to protect followers.

·    Western monastic life included physical labor, and not just study, worship and meditation.

And what type of God was worshipped here? Not a Jewish God with an unspeakable name. Rather, adoration was centered on a God of Incarnation. ‘He’ had come from the realm of iNtuition to live for a lifetime within the physical world of Sensing.

The religious view of Sensing played a positive role as well. Remember that the Jews were bound in a mental straightjacket of religious ritual. They could not think beyond the intellectual patterns imposed by their own Server actions.[JJJJJJ] The situation for the Western church, however, was entirely different. On the one hand, it rejected Jewish ritual. Of course, it introduced its own ritual, but unlike the festivals still performed by the Jewish diaspora, this lacked the official sanction of the Jewish Holy Book, which Christianity still venerated.

On the other hand, the Christian church was, by default, the source of knowledge for all of Western society. When the Roman empire collapsed, only the clergy knew how to read. Therefore, religion was forced to extend its thinking beyond the four bare walls of monastic life, as secular society looked to the church for its education.

The end result was that science had to emerge; all four requirements were present with a vengeance. The rest, as they say, is history.

The (Still)Birth of ?

Well, what about us at the end of the twentieth century? I suggest that we too are on the verge of major change. But what type of transformation? We can use our understanding to work out the answer.

Remember that the four MBTI® splits fall into two categories. T/F and P/J are personal splits, which we can integrate as individuals. In contrast, S/N and I/E are corporate divisions, which can only be tackled by a group. Two millenia ago, it became possible for society to deal with the S/N separation. That opportunity was missed, and the civilization of that day collapsed. One and a half millenia later, the successor civilization brought S and N together, and science came into existence. We now live in a world where, at least objectively, Sensing and iNtuition are highly integrated through science and technology.

Once S and N are linked, it then becomes possible for a society to deal with the I/E split. And that, I suggest, is the challenge which faces us today. It is possible for our present world to tackle this division—to integrate the internal with the external. We ‘have the technology.’[KKKKKK]

But, if history repeats itself, then we too will ‘blow it.’ Our Western Civilization will fall apart, the world will collapse into barbarism, there will be a dark age lasting numerous centuries and then, finally, our successor civilization will bring I and E together. That, if history is any guide, is our fate. But, maybe, just maybe, we can become ‘masters of our fate.’[LLLLLL] If history predicts our fate, then maybe it can also tell us how to change it. So, let us compare our situation with that of the Jews and Greeks and see what obstacles stand in the way of altering our destiny.

For this jump into the future, we will have to use logic to work out what it means for society to tackle the I/E split. We will do this by comparing S/N with I/E.[MMMMMM] When integrating S and N, we found that one of these elements—Sensing—was handled by the me of the physical body, whereas the other—iNtuition—involved the me of Mercy identification.

I suggest that these two me’s are also involved with the I/E split. What defines the external world of E? My physical body. Thus, any change to E will involve the me of the physical body, causing E in this second round to correspond to S in the previous cycle. Similarly, iNtuition, the internal world of I, and the me of Mercy identification are also related.

In addition, if our comparison holds, then we should find that the first of these groups, namely S and E, is associated in some way with a ‘state,’ while the second is related somehow to religion or a ‘church.’ I put these two terms in parentheses because we are predicting the elements of a future civilization, in which both church and state will be different than what they are today.

So what exactly are we looking for? Well, four factors were involved in producing science and technology. First, Mercy importance had to be overcome. Second, Perceiver logic had to be developed. Third, Sensing had to relate to iNtuition in a way that was consistent with Perceiver confidence. Fourth, iNtuition had to include Sensing, also through the use of Perceiver logic.

Thus, when trying to predict the future integration of I and E, we will use an altered version of the four requirements for intellectual growth. On the one hand, Mercy feelings will still get in the way and Perceiver confidence will continue to take effort to develop. This is because humans, no matter what the level of their society, still live in bodies that fill their minds with emotional experiences.

The last two requirements, though, will be slightly different. Our new goal is for Extraversion to relate to Introversion in a logical way, and for Introversion to stretch towards Extraversion in a rational manner. This time, it is I and E that will be glued together by Perceiver logic, rather than S and N. Why is Perceiver glue still needed? Because both I/E and S/N are fundamentally left hemisphere divisions, which can only be integrated by using right hemisphere connections.[NNNNNN]

Finally, we noticed in the previous round that Perceiver logic could be developed in either a ‘religious’ or a ‘secular’ way. The ‘religious’ method used education to build logic into the me of Mercy identification, whereas the ‘secular’ way used external observation to add logic to the me of the physical body.

Today’s society is starting to integrate I/E. The requirements are like those for bridging S/N.

·    Mercy idols must still step back and be replaced by Perceiver logic.

·    I and E must reach together so that they can be ‘stuck’ together with Perceiver ‘glue.’

This integration may occur ‘religiously’ via the emotional me or ‘secularly’ through the physical me.

Now that we have the parallels worked out, let us begin. First, let us examine our present state and church and see whether they are possible candidates for spearheading the mission of integrating I and E. How does one evaluate a possible candidate? Well, since the I/E split is secondary to the S/N division, any group that wants to tackle I/E should already practice extensive integration of S and N, and it should also be expending considerable resources in developing ways to bridge I and E. In contrast, if we find a group that is still stuck in the S/N split, then we can conclude that it has no hopeofever dealing successfully with an I/E division. Why? Because it has already ‘failed’ the exam for the previous ‘class.’

What do we find if we examine today’s ‘state’? We discover an ever-growing bureaucracy. In other words, we find a whole iNtuitive subculture of leaders and verbal experts, all living in an artificial world that is increasingly divorced from any contact with the external realm of Sensing. In response, those who are being governed feel more and more alienated from the state. Thus, not only has government not tackledthe S/N split, but it has been a major factor in perpetuating and magnifying this division. The current ‘state’ obviously cannot be the savior of I/E.

Let us examine this further. What if the state is faced with some external problem, such as environmental disaster or job loss. Does it respond by bridging E and I? No. Generally speaking, it imposes external restrictions while ignoring internal causes or repercussions. Thus, it has no clue about how I and E relate. Similarly, suppose that a citizen shows an internal deficiency. The government’s main response is either to lock up the offending individual or else to throw money at him.[OOOOOO] Both actions demonstrate the lack of any knowledge of meaningful solutions. Thus, we conclude that today’s state is unable to integrate either S/N or I/E.

Why has today’s government become part of the problem? I suggest that it has forsaken its source of democracy.[PPPPPP] In a democracy, the leaders serve the people, and the people elect their leaders. All submit together to the rule of law. In other words, iNtuition and Sensing are glued together by Perceiver logic. This means, at least theoretically, that a democratic government should be integrated in S/N and thus well prepared to deal with any I/E separation.

Unfortunately, the actual level of democracy is quite low in today’s society. Public ‘servants’ no longer bow to the reality of Sensing, but rather create bureaucratic castles in the air—at public expense. In response, the electorate splinters into special interest groups, each convinced that it is ‘the chosen people’ who can ignore other groups. Each fragment struggles to impose its version of ‘universal’ Teacher understanding—based solely in the Server ‘lifestyle’ of that particular group—upon the rest of society.[QQQQQQ] As for logic, it has been replaced by image as Mercy importance takes center stage. In today’s politics, facts survive only as tools in the hands of spin doctors. Therefore, we conclude that today’s state will perish with today’s civilization, and that it will be replaced by a more worthy successor.

Today’s state fails as a candidate for bridging I/E, because it is stuck in an S/N division.

·    Through democracy, it could integrate Sensing and iNtuition.

·    Government bureaucracy avoids Sensing, and special interest groups splinter Sensing.

Unfortunately, the actual level of democracy is quite low in today’s society. Public ‘servants’ no longer bow to the reality of Sensing, but rather create bureaucratic castles in the air—at public expense. In response, the electorate splinters into special interest groups, each convinced that it is ‘the chosen people’ who can ignore other groups. Each fragment struggles to impose its version of ‘universal’ Teacher understanding—based solely in the Server ‘lifestyle’ of that particular group—upon the rest of society.[RRRRRR] As for logic, it has been replaced by image as Mercy importance takes center stage. In today’s politics, facts survive only as tools in the hands of spin doctors. Therefore, we conclude that today’s state will perish with today’s civilization, and that it will be replaced by a more worthy successor.

What about today’s religion? How ready is it to deal with the I/E split? Unfortunately, I suggest that it too has become stuck within an S/N division. In fact, the very structure of today’s church is rooted in a separation between clergy and laity. The former live in a theoretical, religious world of iNtuition, wheras the latter inhabit the real world of Sensing. Thus church, as well as state, has institutionalized the S/N division.

And how does the present insti tutional church, which has failed to integrate S and N, handle the split between I and E? In Protestant churches, the approach has been one of escapism. The typical Protestant 'believes' that when he gets to heaven, then he will become miraculously, instantly, whole. Somehow, the new E of ‘heaven’ will immediately transform the existing I of his mind. Therefore, he can postpone internal change until the improbable future and participate fully in society’s present search for external wealth and prestige.

In similar fashion, many elements of the church teach that the transition from I to E will occur suddenly during ‘the rapture.’ This widely-held doctrine states that the present external world is irredeemable, and that all 'believers' will instantaneously be lifted into the air to heaven, at which point the internal world of religion will suddenly become visible and external.[SSSSSS]

Does the entire church 'believe' in instant change? No. There are individuals, both in the clergy and the laity, who preach and practice some form of meaningful transformation, just as there are public servants in government who really do serve the public. But, we are looking here at the growth of a society, driven by groups of people. Within this arena, we conclude that the institutions of both church and state, at present, are fundamentally deficient.[TTTTTT]

Why has the institutional church failed in its mission? I suggest that this failure was not inevitable. In fact, the Western Church possesses what may be the most potent intellectual weapon in existence for integrating Sensing with iNtuition—the doctrine of Incarnation. This states that God, dwelling within iNtuition, came in physical form to inhabit the human realm of Sensing. What greater connection can there be between N and S? In addition, Christian doctrine strongly affirms that the bridging between iNtuition and Sensing was complete. According to the Nicene Creed, Jesus Christ was both fully God and fully man.[UUUUUU] Therefore, if Christianity really believed in the Incarnation, then it should have been among the first to integrate iNtuition with Sensing.[VVVVVV]

The Western church fails as a candidate for bridging I/E, because it is locked in an S/N division.

·    It could use the doctrine of incarnation to integrate Sensing and iNtuition.

·    The clergy avoid Sensing, and the laity live mainly in secular Sensing. 

However, in contrast to what would have happened if the doctrine of Incarnation were truly believed, the S/N split is very much alive in Christianity. On the one side, most Christians now deny that iNtuition can be comprehended by Sensing. According to common Christian 'belief,' God’s ways are so much higher than ours that we humans who live within the world of Sensing have no hope of ever grasping or fathoming how God operates. And yet, the doctrine of Incarnation insists that the ways of God are completely and totally compatible with the functioning of a normal human being.

On the other side, institutional Christian doctrine is generally shaped by religious Server actions and rituals. Seldom is this ritual-based iNtuition ever connected in any intelligent way with the Sensing realms of either the ‘secular’ world or the domain of science and technology. And yet, the Christian Holy Book states that God in Incarnate form spent most of his time on earth interacting with secular people and working at a technical job.[WWWWWW]

Even the process of ‘becoming a Christian’ twists the doctrine of incarnation in which Christianity officially believes. Supposedly, the one who ‘asks Jesus into his heart’ instantly receives a fully-developed, fully-functioning internal image of Jesus. And yet, Christian incarnation states that God entered human life as a baby and that He took years to grow and mature into adult form.[XXXXXX]

But who cares whether an internal image of some imaginary person has any correspondence to the external life of a real individual? The person who wants to integrate I with E cares, and that is the goal of our present discussion. Therefore, if a group of people possesses the best doctrinal tool for integrating S and N,[YYYYYY] and if it denies that this answer can be extended to bridge I and E, then one concludes that the only solution lies in taking the answer away from this institution and giving it to another group of people who are more worthy. What other choice is there? Like the proverbial dog in the manger, these 'believers' sit on food which they refuse to eat, and yet they growl at others who come to feed.

Both Western church and state possess incredible tools for integrating S/N.

Both have developed into caricatures that deny the solutions they claim to possess.

Let us say this more generally. Both Western church and state possess, within their realms, incredible tools for integrating Sensing and iNtuition. The church has the doctrine of incarnation, and the state has the institution of democracy. And yet, over time, both have developed into caricatures that totally deny the solutions upon which they are based and which in theory they possess. In other words, those who have the answer refuse to apply it, and have in contrast become part of the problem. Thus, both incarnation and democracy can be saved only by replacing the institutions which claim to possess and apply these messages.

The Next State and Church

So, what are the potential successors to the present church and state? Well, what are the qualifications? We need a group of people who have integrated S and N to a large extent and who are pursuing the task of bringing I and E together. The quality of each potential candidate can be evaluated by looking at its level of Perceiver logic and confidence. If the Perceiver confidence exhibited by a specific candidate is high, then we may conclude that it will be easy for the various ‘pieces’ of I and E to ‘glue’ to their corresponding opposites. In contrast, if Mercy importance plays a major role, then we can be sure that the various pieces will only stick together if there is, first of all, a massive injection of Perceiver confidence.[ZZZZZZ]

Let us look at our present ‘modern’ society and try to identify some possible candidates. First, we need a ‘secular’ institution, based in I, which is expanding to E. By secular, we mean one which deals mainly with the me of the physical body. What part of today’s society takes internal structures and turns them into external objects? Technology, in the form of labs, factories, development centers, and so on. How does this segment of society rate in terms of Perceiver confidence? As far as bridging S and N is concerned—tying together theory with application—the amount of Perceiver confidence is quite high. Imagine an engineer designing an airplane out of ‘thin air’ and then having the guts to trust his physical life to his personal creation. That requires real Perceiver confidence.

But, what about the next task of extending I into E? How much logic and confidence is contained within technology? Well, how would one recognize the presence of Perceiver confidence? I suggest that the answer lies in permanence and long-term stability. What function does Perceiver thought normally provide when interacting with the external world? Object recognition. Perceiver strategy examines the external world for objects and connections which are solid and which do not change. Therefore, if technology applies Perceiver logic in going from I to E, then it will produce lasting products that fulfil long-term needs. Does it? Not really. Instead, we live in what is known as an advertising-driven, throw-away, consumer society. Objects are not designed to last. Instead, they are meant to beconsumed—used, discarded, and then replaced by something newer and better. And what motivates these purchases? Generally speaking, advertising that uses emotional importance to implant hypnotic suggestions within the open minds of a gullible audience. Thus, technology uses temporary internal drives to promote throwaway external products.

Technology is a ‘secular’ way of expressing I through E.

·    A consumer society prevents Perceiver logic from being used.

·    If Perceiver thought is added, then advertising will change.

In response, some have turned their backs upon consumerism. Unfortunately, their alternative is also lacking in Perceiver content. The ‘Greens’ may have noble aims in their attempts to protect rainforests, preserve animal habitats and ‘save nature,’ but like the consumers whom they condemn, they too are motivated mainly by emotional importance.

Thus, if we expect technology, in its present form, to save the world and connect I with E, we are sadly mistaken. Unless it receives a major infusion of Perceiver logic, we will have to wait for the next civilization for our solution. What will be the principle sign of the arrival of this Perceiver confidence? A total shift in advertising methods.

Let us now examine the other direction—from E to I. What segment of our society studies the external world and then builds internal structures based upon this examination? Research.

Does research use Perceiver logic to go from external to internal? Yes, it uses Perceiver confidence to tie external Sensing and iNtuition together, and then brings this structure into the internal world. We see this in the approach taken by research. It observes the sensory world, taking great care to focus upon facts and not be deceived by feelings. Then, it tests its information to see how much confidence can be placed in its facts, and uses strict logic to build these facts into an iNtuitive hypothesis. The end result is an internal understanding, rooted in external reality.

This extension from external to internal is also demonstrated by the instruments of research. Their purpose is to measure qualities in the Sensory world. Designing and building these instruments, however, takes extensive iNtuitive thought, and modern instruments contain a multiplicity of components, which function together only because Perceiver thought has been used to connect them in specific ways. Thus, a scientific instrument is an object which uses Perceiver logic to combine Sensing with iNtuition. These instruments allow researchers to extend external observation into realms of the invisible. What was previously hidden can now be viewed on a visible screen, analyzed, and used to expand internal understanding.

So far, therefore, research seems to be an ideal candidate for extending E into I. However, modern research has a major deficiency when it comes to the final step of building an internal structure. If any mental network is to survive intact, it must be integrated around some emotional source, either in Mercy or in Teacher strategy. Today’s research, however, provides neitherof these. Objectivity, on the one hand, stops Mercy feelings from getting involved. This may protect individual Perceiver facts, but it leaves them with no emotional handle onto which to attach themselves. Specialization, on the other hand,prevents the development of strong Teacher feelings. Remember that Teacher thought feels good when many items coalesce into a grand whole. But how can this Teacher emotion form when a researcher spends all of his time investigating some tiny fragment of knowledge and never ‘raises his head’ to see the ‘big picture’? This ‘narrowmindedness’ is completely institutionalized. In order to survive, a researcher must publish—and small, incremental, specialized findings are the simplest to produce and the easiest to get into print.

Research is a ‘secular’ way of going beyond E to I.

·    Specialization prevents Perceiver thought from building lasting internal connections.

·    The addition of Perceiver logic will lead to a belief in ‘God.’

Many thinkers have noticed the fragmented, objective nature of current research and have proposed a more ‘holistic’ approach to study and learning. However, ‘holistic’ is usually synonymous with new age, mystical, and irrational. In other words, those who do add Mercy or Teacher feelings to research are unable to hold on to either Perceiver logic or Server sequence. Thus, we conclude that if research is to help bridge I and E, then it too must undergo a major transformation.

How will one recognize when research has been transformed? It will acknowledge a personal ‘God.’ Why? Because a mental image of ‘God’ emerges whenever a general Teacher theory impinges upon subjective Mercy feelings.[AAAAAAA]

Let us turn now to replacements for the current ‘church.’ Remember that the ‘state’ works with the me of the physical body, whereas the ‘church’ develops the me of Mercy identification. Again, we will find two possible candidates. One is currently using Perceiver logic to extend the me of Mercy identification from E to I, while the other is presently exploiting Perceiver thought to extend the same me from I to E.

So, what segment of society focuses upon external aspects of the emotional me, and then uses rational thinking to build internal structure? Psychology. It specializes in observing external behavior that is driven by personal emotions. And, it attempts to decipher the internal motivations for this behavior. Does it use Perceiver thought? We have seen previously that psychology’s level of Perceiver logic is actually quite high when it observes external behavior. Thus, when it comes to linking external Sensing with iNtuition, Perceiver logic is usually present. A psychologist sticks with the facts when describing what he observes through his senses. And he uses iNtuition to come up with a logical explanation for these facts. In addition, this rational thinking is often augmented through the use of scientific instruments.

So far, so good. As with other research, however, the deficiency lies in the final step. What psychology lacks is not emotional substance, but rather Perceiver connections between internal cause and internal effect. It expends enormous effort trying to avoid any suggestion of personal responsibility.[BBBBBBB] One major method of avoiding guilt is through the syndrome—which I described in the first volume. The syndrome takes an internal emotional shortcoming uncovered by psychology and attributes it to some externalchemical, neurological or physical deficiency: “You are not responsible for your behavior because you have abnormal levels of chemical X.” Of course, it is always possible that the unusual level of chemical X was itself caused by the deficient internal behavior, but in today’s world, making such a suggestion is taboo. A syndrome may remove feelings of guilt, and chemically supplementing a deficiency may, for a while, eliminate many of the symptoms, but removing internal Perceiver connections between cause and effect makes mental life impossible. Remember that mental networks can only become ‘alive’ when Perceiver strategy builds connections that include a sense of time.[CCCCCCC]

Psychology also uses blameto avoid internal connections between cause and effect, and the consequent feelings of guilt. Here, an emotional deficiency is attributed to the influence of other people or an external environment: “You are not to blame, your parents are responsible,” or “You had a terrible upbringing. That is why you act the way you do.” Like the syndrome, blame is an effective way to quiet conscience. But, it also removes a criticalelement of mental life—free will. What is my internal world? It is a network of memories which I choose to hold on to regardless of what occurs externally. If my emotional responses are determined solely by my environment, then this means that I am in a hypnotic trance. In this mental state, any event or person with emotional importance has the ability to completely determine my emotional absolutes. On the other hand, if I am responsible for my behavior, then Perceiver strategy has sufficient confidence to distinguish between me and my emotional absolutes.[DDDDDDD]

Psychology is a ‘religious’ way of looking for I which lies behind E.

·    Blame and the syndrome limit the application of Perceiver logic.

·    Perceiver logic will be present when personal blame and responsibility are fully accepted.

Does every psychologist use blame and the syndrome? No, there are some who believe in personal responsibility, but currently, they are definitely in the minority. But, if psychology is to succeed in ‘saving the world’ then it must, as an organization, accept completely the concept of personal blame, free will, and responsibility. This, I suggest, is the key sign that will signal its readiness to play a role in the transformation of society.

Well, what about a successor to the church that goes from I to E? Is this candidate any better? We can probably answer this question by working out its identity. Which aspect of society takes internal content from the me of Mercy identification andexternalizes it? Entertainment. Music, drama, art, television, and cinema all give external expression to our emotional drives, fears, and aspirations.

Does entertainment accept Perceiver logic? Well, yes and no. On the one hand, artistic technique is highly developed. Raw Server skills are simply not acceptable in today’s entertainment industry. There are schools for artists, musicians, and actors in which performers are taught how to perfect their art. Those who are entertained may think that art is all fun and emotion but professional artists know the hard work and brutal honesty that is required to reach artistic excellence.[EEEEEEE] Similarly, those who work behind the scenes to support the artists are also highly trained and technically competent. In other words, Perceiver facts and logic are used to add iNtuitive excellence to the Sensing skills of the performer.[FFFFFFF]

When it comes to linking I with E, though, the story is completely different. Here, Perceiver facts,  connections, rules, restrictions and conscience are usually avoided as much as possible. The purpose of entertainment, in fact, is to deny the facts of reality. It depicts a world in which cause and effect can be altered, it runs away from rules, it breaks down restrictions and it kills conscience.

Those who are entertained want to escape at least temporarilyto a world free of the tyranny of solid Perceiver information. The ‘entertainee’ prefers to turn off Perceiver thinking and to ‘suspend reality judgment.’ Thus, entertainment produces an externalimage of internal imagination which is impossible to integrate with the real world because it denies critical Perceiver facts of reality. In fact, this is its main reason for existing. If it didn’t visualize the impossible, it would lose most of its audience.

Entertainment is a ‘religious’ way of expressing I through E.

·    Escapism prevents Perceiver logic from being applied.

·    When Perceiver thinking is present, the idea of fiction will disappear.

Of course, there is also an aspect of ‘entertainment’ which fully embraces Perceiver reality and depicts the ‘real world’ in all of its darkness, grit and grime. Is this a solution? No. How can one find salvation in a genre which portrays human filth with brutal honesty and then concludes that change is impossible. Like the entertainment of escapism, ‘reality’ entertainment also accepts the id as absolute, and it too concludes that no Perceiver facts can triumph over Mercy appetites.

So what would change if entertainment acquired Perceiver confidence? I suggest that the concept of fiction would disappear. These days, art and entertainment like to pretend that their ‘fun’ has nothing to do with real life. In fact, observation shows us that art, fiction, drama, and television sitcoms are all very much a product of their age. In other words, there is no such thing as ‘fiction’—only modified reality.

Now that we have looked at the four candidates, let us ask another question. What is the response of the current church and state to their postulated replacements? Looking at the state first, and examining the candidate of technology, we find that modern technology allows companies to ignore national boundaries. Factories are built wherever the labor is cheapest, regardless of the local government. The business mail and business calls that we receive may literally be from anywhere in the world. In fact, with the Internet, one no longer always knows the country of origin. Thus, technology has made the state redundant.

The state also bows to our second candidate of research. Suppose that scientists discover that a particular food causes cancer, or that some aircraft part is faulty. Do governments step in and assert their sovereignty? No, they pass laws supporting the findings of technology regardless of where these findings are made. Again, we find that the state acknowledges the supremacy of its successor.

Looking now at the Western Church, we see that it turns to psychology for answers. Suppose that a member of some congregation goes to his clergy for counseling. Will the minister quote Scriptures to him? These days, probably not. Instead, he will either send the individual to a ‘qualified psychologist’ or else teach him principles developed by psychology. As before, we find the church bowing to its potential successor.

Examining finally the fourth candidate, suppose that the typical Western Church wants to attract an audience. What does it use? Church liturgy and ritual? No. Generally, it tries to copy entertainment. In so doing, it acknowledges that the real church has its headquarters in Hollywood.

Present day state and church accept the importance of their four successors:

·    Technology crosses national boundaries and makes companies more powerful than states.

·    State passes laws to reinforce the findings of research.

·    Church turns to psychology to help its adherents.

·    Church uses entertainment to attract an audience.

Is this good or bad? Well, it depends. If the four successors to the present state and church can be taught Perceiver confidence, then it is good for them to be exalted, in the same way that any king or priest should ensure an orderly transfer of power once he leaves the scene. However, if the ‘new’ state and church continue upon their present idolatrous ways, then we are in for trouble—the same type of disaster that a country faces when its king passes the crown to a corrupt and profligate son.

That brings us back to the issue of social versus personal transformation. Several sections ago, I suggested that I and E can be integrated in one of two ways. Either the external world can swallow up the internal, or else the internal can expand to include the external.

Let us look at the first possibility—E taking over I. This indicates the triumph of social transformation. Why? Because social change uses groups of people to produce change via the external world. If this happens, then the group will swallow up the individual, and state control will invade all areas of personal privacy. What type of society denies individuality, violates privacy, pursues only external goals and works solely with groups? A fascist dictatorship.[GGGGGGG]

And how could one recognize that such a dictatorship is imminent? When groups use external pressure to impose the four signs of Perceiver content. Huh? Very simple. First, current technology is driven by emotionally-based advertising. Suppose that special-interest groups try to influence this advertising through political means. In other words, suppose that they force companies to avoid forms of advertising and to stop building products which they feel are offensive. Perceiver content and conscience have now been added to technology. How? Through external means via group pressure. Hmmm. Sounds like our present world, doesn’t it?

Let us look now at the second point of research and ‘God.’ Are scientists beginning to entertain the concept of a Deity? Yes. But, what sort of ‘God’? A ‘God’ of Nature. This Deity is firmly based in the external world. In fact, ‘He,’ or should I say ‘She,’ is the personification of our physical world. And how does this ‘goddess’ treat the individual? ‘She’ swallows him up, and forces him to become a nameless facet of group mentality.[HHHHHHH] Hmmm. Things really are getting interesting.

Well, what about the third point—adding a sense of guilt and personal responsibility to psychology. This too is presently occurring. Groups are using psychology to blame other groups of people for their problems. What type of problems? External ones, such as poverty, abuse, alcoholism, crime and violence.

That leaves us with the fourth point of removing fiction from entertainment. I suggest that this step also is already occurring. Art and entertainment are no longer regarded as empty fun. Instead, they are viewed as political and ethnic statements. Woe betide the entertainer or movie producer who slights any ethnic or special interest group. Every segment of society demands its share of ‘air time.’ Likewise, every subculture celebrates when its ‘lifestyle’ is depicted on prime time. Notice again the pre-eminence of the group—defined by its external behavior.

Let us summarize. Science and technology have integrated S and N through societal transformation. This success makes it possible for society to tackle the I/E split. The institutions which helped to integrate S and N—church and state—have disqualified themselves from assisting in bringing I and E together. In their place, the best candidates for integrating I and E are technology, research, psychology and entertainment. All four of these, though, lack Perceiver content. This deficiency is currently being addressed through external, group pressure. Therefore, we are on the verge of bringing I and E together. How? By using a megalithic external ‘beast’ to squeeze all internal identity out of individuals. How will we know that E has taken over I? When the average person finds it impossible to conceive of any reality apart from his current physical environment. His internal identity will vanish, and he will know that he is only a nameless cog in the machine of civilization.

The four candidates for integrating I/E all lack Perceiver content.

This Perceiver ‘glue’ can be applied externally through group pressure.

·    This is the path of social transformation that leads to fascism.

This Perceiver ‘glue’ can also be applied internally through individual conscience.

·    This is the road of personal transformation that leads to freedom.

Is that the end? No. The history of communism shows us that building a society upon external group pressure leads to hell on earth. And, people will do everything possible to escape from hell. Eventually, they will turn on the beast and destroy it, and that, most likely, will signal the end of our present civilization. Why? Because civilization itself has become the foe of humanity. Therefore, the gut level response of people will be to destroy their enemy—along with all of its creature comforts. Then, the dark ages will come, and eventually the succeeding civilization will apply the lessons that were learned through the hell of global fascism.

Does this means that the situation is hopeless? No. I suggest that there is a possible escape route. Remember that it is also possible to integrate I and E by extending the internal into the external. Let us explore this possibility and see what it entails. First, what exactly is the internal world? It is an inner personal realm. Every person has his own private, unique internal world. It is the domain of the me of Mercy identification, it is ruled by conscience, and it is programmed by truth. At the present, it is beyond the control of technology and cannot be ruled by external force. How does someone change this internal realm? Through personal transformation, which must begin with an integration of the T/F split.[IIIIIII]

So let us suppose that some individual wanted to save Western Civilization from the hell-on-earth of global fascism. What would he have to do? First, he would have to integrate T/F. How is this done? This process is described in the first volume. Once he has bridged T/F, then he could tackle P/J. In practical terms, this would mean rethinking all rules in terms of lasting excitement—going beyond ‘right’ and ‘wrong’ to ‘life’ and ‘death.’ His next step would involve tying S and N together—as an individual. But isn’t this impossible? Haven’t I stated that humans can only bridge S and N as a group? Yes, I have. But, if an individual ties S and N together by becoming part of a societal group, then he will immediately join the path to fascism—the very thing he is trying to avoid. Therefore, the only option is to integrate S and N personally—regardless of the physical impossibility.[JJJJJJJ] If a person does this then he could be part of the solution, if he met one more requirement. The goal is to take the internal and express it externally. Therefore, this person would have to be motivated solely by an internal world. All of his emotional absolutes and all of his personal drives would have to be internally generated. Why? Because I can only be extended to E if I contains a self-consistent living network which is independent of E.

Suppose that some person—or a few isolated people—reached this impossible mental goal. How could they ever hope to affect the monolithic state/church system? Through conscience. Remember that the internal affects the external by commenting on it with the voice of guilt and conviction. And where would this conscience have to strike society? In the four areas of technology, research, psychology, and entertainment. Huh? That sounds totally, completely impossible. That may be, but the alternative is world-wide hell-on-earth. You take your pick.

‘God’ and the T/F Split

We have seen that modern society has integrated S/N while keeping T/F divided. This combination, I suggest, has caused all of us—whether or not we actually believe in the existence of a Supreme Being—to make certain assertions about the nature of ‘God’ and human existence.

I have mentioned that an image of ‘God’ forms as general Teacher understanding impinges upon Mercy identity. If the mind suffers from a T/F split, the result, I suggest, is a mental paradox for an image of ‘God.’ This is because the T/F division separates Teacher generality from personal emotion.

If a person follows Thinking, logical thought helps him to build general Teacher understanding—the source of an image of ‘God.’ But, because of the T/F split, this understanding is kept apart from subjective Mercy thought. Thus, he does not sense an imageof ‘God.’

In contrast, the one who lives within Feeling will ‘feel the presence of God,’ but he will have a small-minded, irrational view of ‘Deity.’ This is because the T/F split separates Feeling from the Perceiver logic needed to construct a truly general Teacher understanding.[KKKKKKK]

In essence, both religious ‘Feelers’ and secular ‘Thinkers’ conclude that ‘God’ and rational thought are mutually exclusive. This attitude is demonstrated by the treatment shown anyone who attempts to combine rational thinking with an image of ‘God.’

When T/F is split, both 'believers' and skeptics will 'know' that ‘God’ is stupid and irrational.

Consider, for instance, the creationist. He claims to study the natural world as a scientist—occupying the realm of Thinking—while at the same time asserting that this world was created by a personal ‘God’—the area of Feeling. Almost without exception, Western journalists and scientists—those who deal with the facts of Thinking—heap abuse upon the creationist. They assert that evolution is a proven fact and declare that anyone who believes in a personal Creator is, by definition, stupid.[LLLLLLL] This is a valid condemnation—ifthe T/F split cannot be integrated.

Let us explore the effects of a T/F division upon the average person’s approach to the origins of life. On the one hand, the religious 'believer' may state with great fervor that ‘God created the universe,’ but he will seldom use logical thought to explore the implications of this 'belief.' He may saythat God made the entire universe, but his attitude demonstrates that his image of ‘God’ relates only to traumatic experiences and religious ceremonies. In most other areas of life, the so-called believer is essentially an agnostic.[MMMMMMM] This leads to the oxymoron of an insignificant universal God.

On the other hand, while the average scientist has a Teacher understanding of the natural world that is sufficiently universal to create a potent image of ‘God,’ his insistence upon ‘remaining objective’ means that this Teacher theory is never allowed to touch Mercy feelings. This forces him to conclude that the natural world was ‘created’ through the application of an impersonal law of nature—the ‘law’ of evolution. In the same way that the law of gravity causes all objects with mass to be attracted to each other, so he believes that the ‘law’ of evolution causes all living beings to increase in order and complexity.[NNNNNNN]

By declaring evolution to be a ‘natural law,’ the objective scientist, like the religious 'believer,' runs into a logical incongruity. That is because this ‘law’ contradicts the rest of science. Not only is there no scientific law of ‘increasing natural order,’ but in fact there is a scientific law which states that ‘all systems left to themselves tend toward decreasing order.’ in plain English, a pile of sand will not turn into a computer, even if allowed to sit for ‘zillions’ of years.

Of course, this logical contradiction is easy to solve. We all know that sand can turn into a computer, if guided by the hand of some intelligence. But, if the objective scientist were to acknowledge this, then the T/F split in his mind would begin to integrate, and we all 'know' that this is impossible, right? In addition, it would mean believing in the existence of a rational God—and ‘modern’ man is convinced that God, if He exists, is irrational.

“Ah,” says the religious theologian, observing from the side as the discussion over origins rages on, “Ibelieve in the existence of a rational God.” No he doesn’t. That would mean applying rational thinking to the area of religious Feeling. Over the years, I have met religious thinkers who are willing to walk a few steps down the path of rational theology, but I have never yet met one who is prepared to pursue this course to its logical conclusion.

Thus, both the religious theologian and the atheistic scientist ultimately come to the conclusion that God—if He exists—is stupid. Meanwhile, we live in a natural world of incredible elegance, inhabiting physical bodies of mind-boggling complexity, in which each of our cells is literally an entire factory, constructed at the molecular level.[OOOOOOO]

Moving on to our next point, I suggest that the T/F split, when it comes to the origins of life, generates a universal belief that is sufficiently irrational to make logic itself meaningless. Rather than state this belief directly, let me first illustrate it with two analogies.

Suppose that I build a beautiful house at the very edge of a steep cliff, fill it with expensive furniture, and equip it with the latest appliances. Others would probably consider me to be insane. That is because I am improving the contents of the house while ignoring the safety of the house itself. Why build a grand structure if at any moment it could fall to its destruction? Unless the house itself is secure, there is no point in furnishing it.

Or, consider taking a trip into space. Suppose that I test the rocket motors carefully, build a comfortable crew capsule, work out a safe method for returning from orbit, but take only enough oxygen along for half the journey. Others would consider me to be dangerously simple-minded. That is because I have taken care of all of the secondary requirements, while ignoring the fundamentals.

Precisely such stupidity, I suggest, lies at the bottom of most present-day Thinking. The evolutionist, for example, talks about the development of life while insisting that the individual means nothing. He may 'believe' that the universe is several billions years old, but he is equally convinced that hepersonally will be gone within a century. Why wax eloquent about ‘billions of years’ if I—the one who derives pleasure from contemplating this theory—will only last for a hundred? That is like furnishing a house that is about to fall over a cliff. It makes no sense. Why plan for a trip if I know that I will face personal annihilation before it is finished?

The T/F split, I suggest, is responsible for this imbecility. We may use Perceiver logic to look for lasting facts about objective reality, but we will never allow Perceiver logic to determine the long-term stability of personal identity.

So how can a person embrace personal annihilation which such enthusiasm? By appealing to natural law: “It is part of the natural order for life to grow, mature, and die. I would not want to disturb the laws of Nature.” Notice exactly what is happening. The me of the physical body—the part of personal identity that goes through the cycle of growth, maturity, and death—is finding emotional comfort in the Teacher feelings associated with the understanding of science.

The evolutionist is rooted in emotional identification and Mercy idolatry.

·    He happily embraces personal annihilation because his species will survive and grow.

·    This 'belief' is consistent with the self-denial that accompanies revealed 'truth.'

This turns science into philosophy. It looks at the man heading for the ‘gas ovens’ of death and says, “Don’t feel bad, you are part of the natural order. Everyone ends up in the ovens. See, look at all the other death chambers. Yours is not the only one.” Tell me. Would that answer give you comfort? Yet, precisely this is being taught.

Unfortunately, this doctrine of ‘death as the natural end’ contradicts totally the fundamental 'belief' of evolution, which is that ‘life always gets better.’ “But,” says evolution, “you are confusing the individual with the species. The individual may die, but the species improves.”

No. Rather, it is the evolutionist who is confused. A mind which uses Perceiver logic knows that me is not the same as either ‘you’ or ‘us.’ Therefore, it refuses to take comfort in a promise that applies to ‘us’ but not to me. In contrast, only the mind that is ruled by Mercy importance 'knows' that me and ‘us’ are synonymous. Allowing me to feel good about a theory which applies only to ‘us’ proves that evolution is using emotional 'truth' and therefore is a philosophy and not a rational scientific theory.

Moreover, by making its statement about me and ‘us,’ evolution steps over the boundary from general Teacher theory to image of ‘God.’ What type of ‘God’ does it create? The ‘God’ of the fascist dictator: “Your individuality means nothing. All that matters is the group. Come and die for the benefit of the group.”[PPPPPPP] The evolutionist may attack the creationist for ‘believing in a personal God,’ but that is far better than blindly worshipping an inhuman monster: “Bring on the gas chambers. We love to die for our species, it is glorious.”

But, surely I am exaggerating. No one would ever embrace such nihilism, would they? We can answer this question by looking at the example of the First World War. Millions marched to certain death, and those who refused to ‘die for their country’ were ostracized by the rest of society.

But is evolution to blame for this travesty? No. It is only a philosophy that uses the general Teacher theories of science to give emotional comfort to people. Instead, the real culprit is the blind 'faith' of emotional 'truth.' Remember that 'facts' can only stay solid as long as me remains insignificant. Thus, emotional 'truth' and self-denial are inextricably linked. Therefore, wherever emotional 'truth' rules, self-denial follows and destroys me.

That is why government leaders call upon their citizens to ‘die for their country,’ why religion tells its followers to ‘give their lives over to God,’ and why evolution takes pleasure in the annihilation of the individual. As I mentioned at the beginning of the book, emotional 'truth' leads always to personal pain and suffering.

Those who follow Mercy idolatry find comfort in monuments and momentos.

·    They may die, but the monument lives on.

Earlier on, we saw how the physical me can find Teacher comfort in the ‘natural order’ of life-and-death. With self-denial, it is the me of Mercy identification which is finding solace—in Mercy idolatry.[QQQQQQQ] If a dead person is remembered by a monument, then the emotional me 'knows' that this person is still ‘alive.’ Why? Because some external idol keeps the memory of him alive. Thus, as long as we erect plaques, set up gravestones, continue the family name, or build some ‘lasting momento,’ we feel that we will continue to live after we die.

But, we cannot have it both ways. If we believe that personal existence ceases beyond the grave then we cannot state that some symbol will keep it alive. If life is finished, it is finished. Trying to pretend otherwise is self-deception—at the most fundamental level of personal identity itself. But, recognizing such a contradiction takes Perceiver logic, which we will never use as long as we allow the T/F split to remain intact.

So what is the sane response? Let me answer this with another analogy. Suppose that we are on an amusement ride, and we see that this journey ends with a fatal crash in which every car leaves the track and plunges to the concrete below, killing all of its occupants. Would we cheer on this inevitable demise as ‘the natural order of things’? Would we write down the names of those who have died and remember them reverently? No. Instead, we would do everything in our power to get off the ride and avoid the fatal conclusion.

This describes our present situation. The T/F split has blinded us so that we sit mesmerized in our ‘cars,’ passively waiting for the dreaded finale, unable to conceive of anything other than ultimate personal annihilation.

But how do I know that there is life after death? I don’t. But, I do know that there is nothing worse than personal annihilation,[RRRRRRR] and I also know that only personal transformation will make me mentally capable of grasping the alternative. Therefore, if I integrate T/F, I might find a way off the ‘fatal amusement ride.’[SSSSSSS] In contrast, if I leave T/F divided, I will continue blindly to my personal doom.

The objective scientist may accuse the religious 'believer' of blind 'faith,' but at least western religion addresses the question of life-after-death. In contrast, evolution is nothing more than a cheerleader squad for the gas chambers: “Embrace the ovens. Your death will give us enough money to modernize the concentration camp.” I don’t care how much they remodel the buildings. If I end up dead, the result is still the same.

To the one following personal transformation, personal survival is of ultimate importance.

·    I am, therefore I think.

To me, this logic seems inescapable. That is because I use Perceiver logic to define Mercy identity. Thus, my ultimate bottom line is to find Perceiver stability for the Mercy experiences that form me. My personal identity must continue to exist; everything else is secondary. And yet, when I share this reasoning with others, I invariably meet a brick wall. I am forced to conclude that the T/F split has rendered us fundamentally insane.


We have just looked at the dominant forces of our society and have seen that state and church are giving way to science, technology, psychology and entertainment. We have also examined three of the four iNtuitive, Introverted MBTI® types. I suggest that these two topics are related. In fact, I suggest that each of the four candidates for replacing state and church has transformed one of the four iNtuitive Introverted MBTI® categories.

We have already noticed that the INTP naturally gravitates toward science. In other words, the discovery of science has opened up a new world for the INTP. Before, all he could do was study books and use Perceiver logic to analyze their contents—as in the scholasticism of the Middle Ages. Science allows him to go beyond the bookworm stage. It shows him that the entire external world is ‘written’ with iNtuitive sentences, and that he can use internal Thinking to ‘read’ this ‘book’ of Nature.

The INFJ has gone through a similar transformation. Initially, his only option was philosophy—building theories out of semi-deluded self-analysis. But, psychology has allowed him to escape from his self-constructed prison by showing him that he can extend his analysis to other people. Instead of abandoning self to the introspection of naval-gazing, he can broaden his horizons by studying the behavior of society.

With this in mind, let us turn to the INTJ—the fourth iNtuitive Introverted MBTI® type.[TTTTTTT] I suggest that the transformation of his thinking is especially significant because it has happened in our lifetime. We will begin by describing the natural INTJ, and then show how technology has given him a new lease on life.

As usual we will start with the auxiliary or mental assumption, which in this case is Extraverted Thinking. Remember that the MBTI® categories, according to MBTI® theory, are all ‘either-or’—a person uses either one mode or another, but not both. Thus, the INTJ uses Thinking with the external world and suppresses external Feeling. In other words, he approaches his external environment objectively and ignores all subjective emotional Mercy experiences.

Obviously, such a person is not swayed by emotional status. Most people accept the opinions and pronouncements of established authorities. The INTJ does not. He tries to look beyond the ‘experts’ and discover the real facts. He uses logic to evaluate his beliefs, thank you very much.

This viewpoint gives the INTJ an unusual view of reality. Unlike others, he does not fixate upon specific Mercy experiences. As far he is concerned, what really matters is the Perceiver facts that lie behind those experiences. One positive result is external flexibility. He knows that the situations of life can change, and he is equipped to adapt when they do.

Unfortunately, this seemingly ‘rational’ approach of the typical INTJ is full of hypocrisy. This is because, like Spock of Star Trek, the logical INTJ has a ‘human mother.’ Remember that Mercy strategy is the first to develop in a child. All other mental programming grows from this emotional core. Because the INTJ was also a young child at one time, this emotional foundation lives in him as well. Therefore, when the INTJ suppresses external Feeling and focuses upon external Thinking, he is showing others the logical periphery of his mind while at the same time pretending that the emotional core does not exist.

How can one know that this emotional foundation is there? Because the INTJ is a private person who is easily hurt. If he had no subjective emotional core, then he would not need to keep his personal life hidden. But, he is very sensitive to rejection from those with whom he has emotional ties. This shows that his mind really is integrated around personal feelings.

I speak here from personal experience, for, as far as I can tell, I began life as an INTJ. In fact, I suggest that most INTJs are either Perceiver or Contributor persons. Why? Because these two styles both have conscious access to Perceiver thought and they can both see how vulnerable Perceiver confidence is to Mercy pressure. Thus, it is natural for these two styles to emphasize what is conscious, and then defend it by suppressing subjective feeling.

So, am I a typical INTJ hypocrite? Not any more. For years I have struggled to escape from the emotional suppression practiced by the INTJ by integrating facts with feeling. To the extent that I have succeeded in bridging T/F through personal transformation, to that extent I have emerged from the fundamental hypocrisy of the INTJ.[UUUUUUU]

Moving further, hidden within the T/F separation of the typical INTJ is a P/J split. This is because the mental operation of the INTJ depends upon the subjective core that he suppresses. Remember that Perceiver facts cannot ever exist as independententities. Rather, they are connections between Mercy memories. Facts are gathered as Perceiver strategy looks through its ‘window’ into Mercy thought and notices similarities and differences in the ever-flowing stream of Mercy experiences.[VVVVVVV] But what determines which experiences flow by Perceiver thought? Exhorter strategy. Exhorter mode is naturally attracted to experiences with strong emotions. These fill Mercy thought and are then categorized by Perceiver thinking.

Therefore, the attention of the INTJ is driven by the very subjective core that he is suppressing. Subconsciously, in Mercy and Exhorter thought, his mind is continually being attracted to emotional situations in his environment. The INTJ responds by suppressing the feelings and working out the facts. In order to Judge the external world, his mind must always contain a subconscious, suppressed fragment which operates in MBTI® Perceiving.

Others sense this emotional suppression as a sort of generalized condemnation. Let me explain. When the INTJ uses Perceiver strategy to learn facts about people, he is constructing mental ‘self-images’ about them.[WWWWWWW] What type of self-image does the INTJ impose upon others? One which despises personal feelings and which rejects those who express themselves emotionally.

Perceiver facts, by their very nature, apply equally to all Mercy situations. Therefore, this same self-image will be imposed upon the subjective identity of the INTJ himself—a self-image which suppresses external Feeling. Therefore, deep down, the INTJ will know that he has no right to exist in the external world as a person. Notice exactly what is being suppressed. Not the internal feelings of the INTJ. These continue to exist in privacy. Rather, it is his external existence as a living, breathing, feeling person that is being mentally condemned. The INTJ thinks that he will never lead a normal life.

Obviously, no one can live with such a conclusion. But, this is what logic states, and the INTJ assumes that logic applies. Therefore the nagging doubt always remains—I am not a person; I will never have a ‘normal life.’ This fatalism can affect the relationship of the INTJ with members of the opposite sex. On the one hand, he finds it difficult to interact emotionally with others. On the other hand, his self-image predicts that he will never be able to interact emotionally with others. One can see why the INTJ is so sensitive to personal rejection from friends.

Let us turn our attention now to the dominant mode of Introverted iNtuition. What does the INTJ do with the collection of Perceiver facts provided by Extraverted Thinking? He builds an internal world of possibilities, free of any emotional attachment to external idols. This happens in both Mercy and Teacher thought. On the one side, Perceiver facts re-link Mercy experiences and create internal images of what could be. What type of images? Ones that can be implemented in the real world, for these images were created by facts that were acquired through rational external observation. On the other side, whenever Teacher thought in the INTJ is faced with a pile of Perceiver bricks, it is emotionally motivated to build them into a general structure. These theories can usually be applied externally, because they are constructed out of mental bricks that came from the external world. And, because Perceiver strategy hates redundancy, these theories are usually free of repetition and overlap. Also, because of their basis in Perceiver analysis of rational external observation, there is a freedom from emotional idols.

While the INTJ appreciates logic, he lacks the motivation to restrict his thinking to the dry reasoning of higher math and formal logic often pursued by the INTP, who uses the same mental modes of N and T, but switches the dominant and auxiliary. The reason for this is interesting. The INTJ gains most of his facts by analyzing emotional situations from the external world. If he tried to focus upon internal rules of logic, he would have to use confidence to direct subconscious attention away from the external stream of emotional Mercy events.[XXXXXXX] This would be a losing battle, because emotionally driven Exhorter excitement will almost always win out eventually over Perceiver inhibition. However, if the INTJ can use internal iNtuition to build internal theories and visions, then this internally generatedTeacher and Mercy feeling can pull the attention of subconscious Exhorter thought away from the stream of external Mercy input.

In fact, if these internally produced feelings are strong enough, then the internal world will become the main focus of subconscious Exhorter attention. As a result, the ideas of the INTJ often acquire a life of their own—Exhorter strategy finds internal emotion exciting, this drives his mind, he acquires more facts, these add to internal structure and create more excitement for Exhorter thought.

The INTJ may be good at building internal structure, but he has problems when it comes to implementation. On the one hand, he is motivated to apply his theories and visions. This is because they are constructed out of facts gleaned from the external world. Therefore, by applying the theory or vision, the INTJ would gain more external facts.

On the other hand, the ideas of the INTJ lack two critical components. First, they exclude human feelings. Thus, the INTJ finds it easiest to apply his ideas in areas of life which are objective. Second, they gloss over Server skills. The INTJ may know what is logical, but he has a much weaker grasp of what is doable.[YYYYYYY] Therefore, the ideas of the INTJ are usually applied to organizations and institutions, because these entities ignore personal feelings and they maintain a distinction between instructions and actions. Here, he can focus on words and know that actions, by others, will follow.

The INTJ emphasizes the mental circuit that is associated with technology.

·    An auxiliary of Extraverted Thinking divides the external world into logical facts and objects.

·    A dominant of Introverted iNtuition assembles these facts and objects into abstract structures.

Let us look now at the way in which technology has transformed the INTJ. We will focus upon consumer electronics because these attract the attention of the INTJ most strongly. First, there is an external world full of Perceiver objects. Electronic stores are filled with ‘black boxes’ such as audio equipment, video gadgetry and high-tech computers. These devices are completely free of Mercy emotions and obey only Perceiver logic. This satisfies the INTJ’s auxiliary mode of Extraverted Thinking.

Second, consumer electronics provide a continuing stream of novel and improved devices. Almost every day, new gadgets appear which make old ones obsolete. Thus, not only is auxiliary Thinking satisfied, but there is enough externally generated novelty and excitement to keep subconscious Exhorter strategy fixated.

Third, there are iNtuitive possibilities. Electronic devices can be assembled to form systems. In other words, these Perceiver objects can be tied together to form both awe-inspiring examples of Teacher order-within-complexity and amazing exhibits of Mercy wonder. Simply imagining these possibilities is sufficient to quicken the heartbeat of the INTJ.

Fourth, there is a minimum of Server skills. Assembling electronic components does not require years of practice. A modicum of manual dexterity is sufficient. In fact, most electronic components fit together like building blocks. Thus, the INTJ finds that iNtuitive thought, apart from Sensing, is sufficient to allow him to enter the magical world of electronics.

Fifth, not only is iNtuition sufficient, but it is also necessary. With mechanical devices, you can observe gears turning and rods moving. When they need fixing, you can usually see where the problem is. This triggers Sensing. In contrast, electronic devices work invisibly. You cannot use Sensingeither to observe or to understand them. Instead, you must use iNtuition to imagine how they do or do not work, based upon the few physical components that you can actually see, and the connections between them.

Finally, programmable electronics, such as computers, are actually controlled through iNtuition. Very little physical movement is required. Instead, you type in verbal instructions, or use the mouse to manipulate symbolic objects that can be seen on the screen.[ZZZZZZZ]

You can see why the INTJ turns easily into a techno-freak. Technology transforms his mode of thought and frees him from emotional contact with people. This does not mean that the INTJ avoids all individuals. He is always happy to interact with those who share his technical bias, because this interaction focuses upon facts and derives its emotional pleasure from technical possibility.

The INFP and Entertainment

We have now looked at how three of the four Introverted iNtuitive MBTI® styles have been transformed through the development of the ‘new’ church and state. Science has transformed the INTP, technology has changed the INTJ, and psychology has given new birth to the INFJ. That leaves the INFP and entertainment.

Are these two related? The INFP is the one who follows revealed 'truth' as a religion. Has religion been ‘transformed’ by entertainment? My experience is that few institutions have embraced entertainment as fully as the Western Protestant church—the former bastion of revealed 'truth.' 'Believers' gravitate to mega-churches which specialize in entertainment. Here, they ‘worship’ God through entertaining musical productions, listen to entertaining sermons by charismatic preachers, and attract converts by entertaining them into the kingdom.

The four IN types each emphasize one of the four candidates for future state and church.

·    The INTP moves beyond scholasticism to focus upon science—or research.

·    The INTJ lets go of idealism and follows technology.

·    The INFJ goes past philosophy to develop psychology.

·    The INFP leaves religion and embraces entertainment.

Let me put this another way. Which country is the world center for Protestant 'faith'? The United States. And, which country is the world headquarters for entertainment, and exports its entertainment to the rest of the world? The United States.

But why would revealed 'faith' be attracted to entertainment? Because both share the same MBTI® type. In other words, both revealed 'faith' and entertainment use INFP processing. Let me explain. Revealed 'truth' assumes Extraverted iNtuition—an external source of words. This 'truth' is used to produce internal emotional effects—iNtroverted Feeling. This we know. What about entertainment?

First, the primary goal of entertainment is to make me feel good—to give me fun. Which me? The me of Mercy identification. Thus, like revealed 'faith,' it also has a dominant mode of Introverted Feeling. Second, it produces this internal Feeling by setting up an artificial, external environment. In other words, entertainment avoids the Sensing world of here-and-now and gives the impression of existing at some other place or time. Thus, entertainment requiresan auxiliary of Extraverted iNtuition.

When you go to Disneyland, for instance, you enter a ‘magical kingdom.’ It is an artificial realm with its own external Teacher order, based upon the Mercy absolutes of its designers—a world that gives the impression of being separate from the normal Sensing world.

But why has revealed 'faith' been displaced by entertainment? Because science, technology, and media have all conspired to reduce the emotional significance of revealed 'truth.' As I said before, all book learning has become old-fashioned and outdated. The demise of traditional 'faith' is one symptom of a very general trend.

A transition from Protestant church to religu-tainment generally goes through three stages.[AAAAAAAA] First, people acquire ‘itching ears.’ Initially, 'believers' accepted the external Holy Book as absolute and lived with whatever emotional results were produced internally. Now, their primary goal is to feel good inside. Therefore, they demand that the preaching from the external Holy Book be modified to generate this emotional result. In other words, people focus upon the dominant mode of Introverted Feeling to the exclusion of the auxiliary of Extraverted iNtuition. The result is that the teaching from the Holy Book becomes selective. Passages that make me feel good are emphasized while those that make me feel bad are downplayed. Why does this transition occur? Because me has gained in emotional importance relative to the emotional status of the image of ‘God’ derived from the Holy Book.

Second, 'believers' look for entertainment in the guise of revelation. This occurs when the Mercy feelings associated with entertainment become strong enough to attack and redefine the Perceiver meanings given to the words of the Holy Book. Such a church still talks about the Holy Book, but everything else increasingly centers around entertainment. In terms of MBTI®, people fixate so strongly upon the dominant mode of Introverted Feeling, that the auxiliary of Extraverted iNtuition begins to crumble.

A sign of this transition is that people stop studying the Holy Book and instead emphasize programs of entertainment. If they do talk about their 'beliefs,' this discussion will, as much as possible, be presented in an entertaining way. During this stage, those who attempt to re-establish Perceiver meaning will be silenced, because their analysis has the power to make me feel guilty, and the first stage established that all words that make me feel bad must be avoided.

If confronted with their doctrinal shortcomings, then the defense of the leaders will be: “But we must use entertainment to attract an audience for our Holy Book.” Any quotes from the Holy Book which attack this subjugation of ends to means will be ignored. This shows that the real Mercy absolutes now come from entertainment and not from the Holy Book. In plain English, those who claim to worship the God of the Bible now worship athletes, actors, and other entertainers.

Finally, all pretenses are dropped. No longer do people even pretend to worship God or 'believe' in a Holy Book. Instead, they join the new religion of entertainment—and accept this as a legitimate system of belief. This indicates that traditional religion has been belittled in their minds sufficiently for them to ignore that it exists.

Paradoxically, those who go through this step of ‘abandoning the faith’ may actually feel that they are experiencing spiritual revival. And, in terms of MBTI®, they are. 'Believers' sense that their auxiliary mode of Extraverted iNtuition is in trouble and they devote themselves to the task of shoring up this mental foundation. However, they do not realize that their ‘revived’ 'faith' is now built upon a different source.

When the MBTI® auxiliary shifts, then abandoning the 'faith' can appear like religious revival.

But why does this apostasy look like revival? Because the dominant changed the nature of the auxiliary. Originally, the auxiliary of Extraverted iNtuition was build upon the words of a Holy Book—and studying a book implies the presence of Perceiver confidence. In contrast, a dominant of Introverted Feeling will, by its very nature, attack Perceiver logic. Therefore, by fixating upon the dominant of Introverted Feeling, 'believers' inadvertently destroyed the content with which their auxiliary of Extraverted iNtuition was programmed. Combine this with a society in which entertainment has replaced written revelation and you find religious apostasy masquerading as MBTI® revival.

In essence, such religious 'believers' have ‘graduated,’ or should I rather say ‘dropped out,’ of the school of revealed 'truth.' But then, haven’t we stated that revealed 'truth' has only a finite lifetime? All of its adherents, I suggest, eventuallyeither graduate or drop out.

One final general issue. I have suggested that four of the MBTI® types are associated with the four replacements for state and religion. Why the four that combine iNtuitive thought with an Introverted dominant? First, remember that we are looking at the path of social transformation. Therefore, we require a thinking pattern that goes beyond the personal to deal with the corporate. Only iNtuitive thought qualifies, for it denies the limited world of Sensing and looks instead at the ‘big picture.’

Second, we are dealing with social transformation, in which the external world is altered. Who will this affect the most? Those whose thought is based in external reality; whose auxiliary mode is Extraverted. Changing the external environment overturns their mental assumptions, channeling their mental development onto a different path. The transition from revealed 'truth' to entertainment which we just discussed illustrates the process by which such passive change occurs.[BBBBBBBB]

[A] Science also includes one additional step of testing the general Teacher theory that has been developed. This is done by Server thought, which we have not yet examined in detail.

[B] Even when science works with static events, it seems to approach the situation in an active way. The goal is not just to file and to classify, but rather to study the relationship between the various elements.

[C] He was a Teacher person, and therefore driven mentally to bring order into complexity. His initial success jump-started scientific thought and paved the way for other researchers.

[D] See, there is a type of ‘religious belief’ that goes so far beyond traditional religion that it isn’t even recognized as religious.

[E] Notice that we are talking here about resolving the MBTI® T/F split. Hold that thought for a few pages.

[F] Oooh. Now we referring to the MBTI® I/E split.

[G] Morality means living within the rules. That sounds awfully much like integrating the MBTI® P/J division.

[H] A few paragraphs earlier we used science as a pattern for understanding the shortcomings of MBTI®. Now we will use MBTI® to analyze the limitations of science.

[I] Unless they are applying for a research grant, trying to get tenure, or attempting to work their way up the university ladder.

[J] This schizophrenic process is implemented through a division of labor, which, by definition, requires a group. Hence the term societal transformation.

[K] Unless the individual integrates both T/F and P/J and then tackles S/N. However, that type of individual will be hard to find in a world such as ours which accepts the split between subjective and objective as universal 'truth.'

[L] INTP = dominant Introverted Thinking or IT built upon an auxiliary Extraverted iNtution or EN.

[M] Remember that the MBTI® categories define mental splits. A person emphasizes one side of the division and suppresses the other. He does this because it is the easiest and shortest way to develop and maintain mental life.

[N] Why books? Why not talking or television? Because talking involves people which trigger Mercy feelings. Similarly, television contains pictures which program Mercy thought. The INTP, however, emphasizes Teacher emotion and not Mercy feelings.

[O] By forming and breaking connections, Perceiver strategy indirectly controls the path that Exhorter thought takes on its journey in search of emotional excitement.

[P] Those who follow New Age thinking sometimes assert that we are no better than previous cultures. However, I suggest that one day of living in the filthy, putrid, crude, superstitious, and brutal conditions of the past would convince them otherwise.

[Q] The emerging mindset of political correctness is producing a new philosophy of historical revisionism.

[R] Combine this with the previous point, and you end up with philosophers 'knowing' that they cannot 'know' anything—adamantly defending their right not to be adamant. If faced with this contradiction, the philosopher may stop asserting that 'knowing' is impossible, but he will continue to censor and reject any beliefs that touch the philosopher’s region of un-'knowing.'

[S] The next section will explain the connection between philosophy, psychology, and self-analysis.

[T] That is why the beginning of this book developed a general Teacher theory that made me feel bad about its current condition.

[U] I am not making this up. These are almost direct quotes from the Encyclopaedia Britannica.

[V] Remember the five ‘whammies.’

[W] Mature in the sense of ‘fully developed.’

[X] Remember that me rises in relative importance whenever I think about a topic. Therefore, thinking too much about emotional 'truth' will eventually cause me to doubt these 'facts.' Ultimately, all that is left is me thinking—the starting point for Descartes.

[Y] This is why I have chosen to discuss Facilitator strategy last. Unless the other modes of thought are in place, there is no point in examining Facilitator thinking. Note that we are looking here at the relationship between Facilitator thought and mental content—mediated by Perceiver, Mercy, Server and Teacher thought. There can also be struggles between Facilitator mode and the two other composite styles (Exhorter and Contributor).

[Z] This is a major idea, and I am stating it in only one sentence. Lane examines this topic in much more detail in his book, ‘The Mark of a Beast.’

[AA] This separation is breaking down. Many universities now have associated research parks. This bottom-line thinking indicates the emergence of Contributor thought.

[BB] Not all Facilitator persons value statistics in this way, but those who follow abstract thought inevitably generate reams of written data.

[CC] In addition, a society such as ours that pursues external growth while ignoring internal development will achieve social transformation at the expense of personal transformation.

[DD] If the three composite styles are to be included, then there must also be excitement for the Exhorter, plans for the Contributor, and fine-tuning for the Facilitator.

[EE] The Facilitator person can see subconscious memories but he is unaware of subconscious processing. Therefore, he accepts individual memories while running roughshod over modes of thought. In other words, he accepts mental software while rejecting mental hardware.

[FF] By the way, I suggest that this section provides an explanation for the ‘Dedication’ in my first book, which I dedicated “To Life, whose Form gave me hope when all else failed.” Apparently, people who read this find it jarring and presumptuous. In the very section where I am supposed to acknowledgeothers, I lift up a creation of my own imagination. If subjective 'truth' can only be discovered through the methods of philosophy, then this is a valid conclusion—it is arrogant for me to dedicate my work to a pure figment of my imagination. But, if it is possible for Perceiver thought to discover universal truth about mental ‘life’—the assertion of this book—then I am not the creator of such 'truth'but rather its discoverer. By acknowledging the ‘form of life’ as my final inspiration, I, as a Perceiver person, am submitting conscious thought to the principle that Perceiver absolutes are not independent entities, but rather determined by mental ‘life’—an integrated set of requirements involving the cooperation of all seven cognitive styles.

[GG] This means giving solid facts to Perceiver thought, pleasant experiences to Mercy strategy, and so on.

[HH] We know that Sensing is not involved because the typical philosopher concludes his analysis by stating that his understanding cannot be applied.

[II] In technical terms, Perceiver thought accepts the specific arrangement of single situations to be universal 'truth.' Thus, if I am bitten by a dog, then Perceiver strategy 'knows' that all dogs always bite people.

[JJ] Don’t blame me for this list. Most of the material comes from Please Understand Me by David Keirsey and Marilyn Bates.

[KK] It is also fairly common to find Mercy psychologists. One thinks, for example, of Dr. Spock, the famous child care expert. Mercy psychologists are often well-versed in the various Facilitator philosophies.

[LL] The Facilitator is able to observe himself as if he is another person. This is because he is conscious in the ‘secretary’ of the mind, a mode which monitors and adjusts mental operation.

[MM] I refer to this type of logic as ‘proof by example.’ It is also prevalent in the Exhorter person.

[NN] To the extent that the Facilitator person makes the best of the existing situation, to that extent his overall direction will be determined by his internal and external environment.

[OO] The Mercy person also has a very limited form of mental awareness. He is naturally gifted at deciphering a person’s emotional state but finds it much more difficult to work out methods of changing this condition.

[PP] This is one of the main motivations behind political correctness.

[QQ] As I suggested earlier, the Facilitator philosopher respects subconscious memories while suppressing subconscious processing.

[RR] He is therefore skilled at listening to someone, and yet at the same time not hearing a single word that is being said. For him it comes easily, because Perceiver strategy within his mind, which is responsible for comprehension, is often highly fragmented.

[SS] Facilitator thought plays an essential role—if the rest of the mind is programmed. When mental development is incomplete, though, Facilitator strategy has a habit of winning the battle while losing the war.

[TT] Our research suggests that essentially all philosophers are Facilitator persons. In contrast, INFJ traits other than philosophy can be found in Mercy and Contributor persons as well as in Facilitators.

[UU] 4 = 2 + 1 + 1. The math is simple. The process is not.

[VV] Wait. Didn’t I say that ‘life’ requires the four simple styles? Now I bring in Contributor and Exhorter thought. Huh? This book is examining the content required for ‘life.’ Once the mental ‘computer’ is programmed, then the composite styles do the actual running of the program. Contributor and Exhorter strategies do play a critical role in integrating the mind, mainly in the realm of choice and motivation. Whenever one chooses to follow one option instead of another, Contributor thought is responsible for this choice. Whenever motivation changes, it is because Exhorter mode is following a different mental path. Generally speaking, if the content is in place, then drive and decision follow. Thus, as a first approximation, we can ignore the role played by Exhorter and Contributor strategies. It will be covered in the next book.

[WW] This mechanism is the mirror image of the way in which general understanding grows into an image of ‘God’ in the INFP.

[XX] Whoa! Heavy concept. If this statement is accurate, then it has major implications. You work them out.

[YY] History indicates that the Exhorter person often has what those around him refer to as a ‘magnetic’ personality, and that it can affect the health of others.

[ZZ] This itself is a ‘psychic’ statement because it uses a general Teacher theory to integrate a host of emotional Mercy experiences.

[AAA] This third stage leads to two possibilities. First, mental development may extend beyond the limited ‘life’ of the MBTI® categories. This will occur if a person continues to respect his original assumptions. Second, he may change MBTI® modes by basing his thought in a new set of assumptions.

[BBB] Or facts—without the straight quotes. The key feature is Perceiver stability.

[CCC] Perceiver logic creates solid Perceiver facts. But, forming solid facts into a general Teacher understanding is like assembling a jigsaw puzzle—the pieces only go together in a specific way. The mind that goes ‘beyond logic’ forces the pieces to fit into a grand theory by ‘rubbing the sharp edges off the Perceiver facts.’ In the extreme, the Buddhist theory of ‘Oneness’ fits everything together instantly by denying all Perceiver ‘shape’ as illusion.

[DDD] I mentioned before that the MBTI® modes describe the minimum that is required for mental ‘life.’ We now see some of the ways in which ‘life’ can stretch beyond this minimum.

[EEE] Remember that so-called secular education has its own revealed 'truth,' along with ancillary holy places, institutions, and clergy.

[FFF] I use this convoluted language because Mercy strategy really senses a combination of Teacher and Mercy feelings. Mercy thought may not be able to ‘see’ Teacher memories, but it can definitely feel Teacher emotions.

[GGG] The Teacher person initially makes sweeping statements—the generality of his assertions are then limited as they collide with reality.

[HHH] Teacher growth is actually the mirror image of personal transformation. In place of Mercy identity being torn apart and reassembled, Teacher understanding goes through the process. Notice also that building a general Teacher understanding is the second step in the three-stage process of rebuilding Mercy identity—these two processes interact.

[III] Notice the related assumptions. First, the philosopher assumes that he 'knows.' Most of his Perceiver knowing, though, is actually rooted in the defining Mercy experiences of his culture. Second, the Buddhist philosopher needs complexity that can give depth to his universal Teacher theory of ‘oneness.’ This he finds in the pool of facts and experiences that make up his culture—upon which his mind is actually based. Thus, he mentally closes the loop, beginning with a Mercy assumption of culture while claiming to follow Perceiver logic, and ending with a Mercy assumption of culture while denouncing Mercy experiences and claiming to pursue Teacher generality. He is thus doubly bound to his culture.

[JJJ] Asian culture is thus extremely open—as a group—to science and its associated technology, for they also integrate Sensing and iNtuition externally while leaving Thinking and Feeling untouched. In essence, Japanese technological companies take over the role of Confucianist elders, providing for their employees lifetime employment and physical stability in the realm of Sensing. Notice that all of this occurs corporately and not individually.

[KKK] Psychology regards mental distinctions of ‘same’ and ‘different’ as one of the first signs of adult intelligence. This suggests that psychology faces the same issues as philosophy but at least tries to deal with them through the use of Perceiver logic.

[LLL] Taoism provides many of the mystical overtones.

[MMM] Plotinus was born about 204 AD. Porphyry was one of his pupils, and Iamblichus was a student of Porphyry. It is enlightening to read about the ‘Buddhism’ of Plotinus and its demise in the succeeding philosophies of Porphyry and Iamblichus.

[NNN] The two major invasions of China each wiped out about one quarter of the Chinese population. In total, about fifty million Chinese people died.

[OOO] We will take a more detailed look at Zen in a later book when we discuss Server strategy.

[PPP] We have seen already that a society that applies science and technology, such as the present Western world, is highly compatible with Buddhism and its companion Confucianism—both resolve the Sensing/iNtuition split externally.

[QQQ] Modern Science attaches many Perceiver facts to its general Teacher theories. Personalized religion accepts Perceiver distinctions between one individual and another, and expects each 'believer' to acquire his own doctrinal 'facts.' In a few pages, we will look at the relationship between revealed 'truth' and science.

[RRR] The development of science and technology required internal cooperation between Sensing and iNtuition. In contrast, a technological society can survive on external connections between Sensing and iNtuition. I suggest that it is the technological society that has been embraced by Japan. Thinking and Feeling, of course, remain separated.

[SSS] Philosophy also protects the human assumption—a concept that we will discuss in the next book.

[TTT] The theory of MBTI®, for example, provides words and concepts which allow us to discuss ideas that would otherwise be completely outside of the realm of political correctness.

[UUU] The simple styles define life. The composite styles operate it. The energy and excitement of life is provided by Exhorter strategy, which requires continuing novelty.

[VVV] Does this mean that there is nothing good about Buddhist thought? Not necessarily. I suggest that Buddhism performs two related essential functions, and that it will survive until a better alternative emerges. What does Buddhism do? It ties together Teacher and Mercy thought, and it bridgesfinite and infinite. It may perform this job with the finesse of a sledgehammer, but at least it does it.

[WWW] This suggests that there really is a basis to the Eastern concept of yin and yang.

[XXX] I don’t say that it is impossible, but rather that it is more difficult. In essence, the stakes get higher. If personal transformation is harder, it also becomes more rewarding for those who achieve it.

[YYY] Remember that S/N and T/F are the two primary MBTI® divisions. S/N must be integrated before I/E can be tackled. Similarly, T/F must be dealt with before P/J can be handled.

[ZZZ] To a first approximation, these equivalences are true. We will study the connections more carefully in another book, when we look at Server strategy. Even when secondary effects are included, the primary task still remains that of tying Server and Teacher strategies together.

[AAAA] Here, I am stating the principle. Later on I will explain it.

[BBBB] By the way, this is the kind of sweeping statement that delights a Teacher person.

[CCCC] Remember the section headed ‘Clutching a Hot Iron.’

[DDDD] This happens when those who suffer the consequences of violating cause and effect demand approval from the rest of society.

[EEEE] It is also possible for a book to talk about damnation. This type of volume describes cause and effect, but all of the results are painful. Such a book, I suggest, will not be accepted by Sensing—because no one wants their body to continue hurting. In other words, Mercy pain will tend to ‘melt’ the Perceiver ‘glue’ that binds Sensing and iNtuition together. In such a case, Sensing will usually try to avoidfollowing the instructions of the book too closely, but be driven by iNtuition to perform acts of self-destruction if the book is ever threatened. The Quran, I suggest, is such a book, for it talks primarily about judgement. For example: “When we resolve to destroy a city, We first give warning to those of its people who live in comfort. If they persist in sin, judgement is irrevocably passed, and We raze that city to the ground. How many generations have We destroyed since Noah’s time…There is no nation but We shall destroy or sternly punish before the Day of Resurrection. That is decreed in the Eternal Book.” 

[FFFF] This explains why the concept of mental symmetry is being presented as a fully developed theory. When we presented our initial findings to others, we found that the fourth requirement was not present. People simply lacked curiosity. We found ourselves coming up with answers to questions that people were not asking, and in fact did not wish to ask. And so we kept on working.

[GGGG] What about the American and French revolutions? The American revolution was guided largely by the rule of law. Therefore, it had beneficial results, though an underlying current of rebellion remains within the American character. The French revolution, in contrast, collapsed quickly into chaos and dictatorship.

[HHHH] Defining me involves the right hemisphere world of objects and experiences. In contrast, the operation of me is determined by the left hemisphere realm of actions and theories.

[IIII] As I mentioned before, integrating S/N brings unity to the operation of me. Consider, for instance, the lifestyle of the typical Western worker. He lives at home and commutes to work. On the one hand, the experiences of home are separated from the experiences of work—a result of the T/F split. On the other hand, a whole network of highways and transit systems has been set up to smooth the operation of me as it moves between subjective and objective experiences.

[JJJJ] Notice that this split is different than the resignation of the philosopher. The philosopher concludes his theory by continuing to accept the Perceiver rules and Mercy experiences of his culture. This leads to a division between iNtuition, in which his philosophy rules, and Sensing, in which he submits to the mores of his society. In contrast, the one who integrates T/F limits his involvement with culture. In areas where the words and actions of his society are consistent with personal transformation, he continues to interact with others. In contrast, he tries not to act and talk in ways that contradict personal transformation. Similarly, he focuses upon ideas and plans that express his internal vision while refusing to get caught up in theories or schemes that oppose this vision.

[KKKK] This order is illustrated by the diagram of mental symmetry. M connects to P which links, through C, to S.

[LLLL] This sort of mental processing occurs all the time. For instance, suppose that I feel hungry. Perceiver thought will inform my mind that this experience of hunger is an aspect of the object that is my physical body. Now suppose that I look up and see an apple on the shelf. Perceiver strategy will recognize this object, and Perceiver facts about food will link Mercy memories in such a way to form an internal Mercy image of me enjoying the apple. Server strategy will then ‘get the hint’ and carry out the action of retrieving and eating the desired object.

[MMMM] Why objective excellence? Because this is where most people specialize. This is because science and technology have transformed objective reality.

[NNNN] This order is also shown by the diagram of mental symmetry. T connects to S which links, through C, to P.

[OOOO] Just try to make a public pronouncement about a topic in which you are not qualified. Your words will not get very far.

[PPPP] Think, for example, of restricted military areas. Those who inhabitthese bastions of high-tech weaponry are forbidden to talk about what they do, while the average person is not permitted to visit these premises. When social transformation is followed to the exclusion of personal transformation, then such restrictions become absolute. Personal rights and freedom of information mean nothing. Secrecy and control determine everything.

[QQQQ] Consider, for example, the law of gravity. On the one hand, wherever an object is dropped (or thrown, or orbited), it will follow a similar path. Thus we have repeatable process. On the other hand, the law of gravity says nothing about which object is being manipulated. Therefore, we have replaceableobjects.

[RRRR] This is another one of those sweeping kinds of statements that makes a Teacher person feel good.

[SSSS] It acts mainly as an ‘alarm system’ warning me if I am about to do something that may result in bodily harm.

[TTTT] This suggests that the idea of an ‘aboriginal first nation’ is a contradiction in terms. Before the rule of law, there were no nations, only tribes. So what happens if a tribe, in contrast to a nation, applies the rule of law? As we saw before, tribalism attempts to impose its idols and its desires upon all competing groups. But, the rule of law builds connections between people that are solid and lasting. Therefore, one can predict that a tribe would use the rule of law to impose its idols and desires on other groups in ways that are solid and lasting. In the extreme, this would lead to ethnic cleansing and genocide.

[UUUU] If a book really is exalted as holy, then there can be no other conclusion.

[VVVV] We are looking here, because of the nature of revealed 'truth,' at a mixture of emotional 'truth' and Perceiver confidence. Therefore, I am not using straight quotes, despite talking about religious 'belief.'

[WWWW] A very effective way to add Mercy feelings to Teacher words is to set words to music.

[XXXX] Personal transformation integrates the T/F split; society as a whole tackles the S/N division. We are currently discussing this second alternative, and its role in the development of science.

[YYYY] But what about education? Patience. We’ll get to that.

[ZZZZ] Conscience naturally acts as an internal warning system that prevents us from doing actions that lead to harm. Here, it warns 'believers' not to act in ways that contradict the words of revealed 'truth.' If 'believers' are turning 'truth' into truth, then there will be two overlapping aspects to conscience, one rooted in 'facts,' the other in facts. With blind 'faith,' though, the ‘warning system’ that is based in 'truth' can end up completely opposing natural law. This is because revealed 'truth' requires an attitude of self-denial. If this self-denial begins to set the standards for 'conscience,' then 'believers' will feel guilty when they try to protect themselves from harm.

[AAAAA] When church and state are bridged externally, the result is a monolithic, organizational system that includes both church and state. In contrast, bridging these two internally must be done by the individual, as he mentally integrates conscience and action.

[BBBBB] Revealed 'truth' can create a hierarchy without the help of property. This is because some people become accepted as better interpreters of 'truth' than others. Church expands into the realm of the state when religious authorities acquire control over physical property.

[CCCCC] Does this mean that the church should have no external things? I think not. A church needs some physical property in order to carry on its work of education and worship. But, if a church ever focuses on acquiring property or attempts to hold on to its possessions, then it will lose the moral high ground. A church does not need property to program conscience in its followers, and if this voice of conscience is sufficiently strong, the institutional church will eventually be given both property and physical protection.

[DDDDD] Teacher strategy loves order-within-complexity. Therefore, Teacher emotion drives any bureaucracy to grow in both order and complexity.

[EEEEE] I suggest that the state should have sufficient intellectual independence from the conscience of church to protect it from being swallowed up by church 'beliefs.' Thus, it should be possible for individuals to pursue ‘secular’ thought. Should the state preach secular thought? No, that option would replace church with the emotionally empty ‘religion’ of secular exclusivity. Instead, the state should encourage secular thought by passing and enforcing laws that are consistent with common sense.

[FFFFF] An image of ‘God’ forms as general Teacher understanding impinges upon subjective Mercy thought. Prayer is Mercy-based me using Teacher words to adjust my general Teacher understanding. Thus, prayer is the ‘opposite’ partner to an image of ‘God.’

[GGGGG] As I mentioned in a previous footnote, secular education has turned into an un-religion based upon the suppression of overt religious belief, practice or discussion. Eventually, this un-teaching will succeed in removing even the memory of religion from pupils. Once this happens, then students will attempt to fill their ‘spiritual’ vacuum with religious 'belief.' However, lacking positive religious instruction, they will approach 'belief' as mental infants. This will make them very susceptible to spiritual ‘junk food,’ cult leaders, and dictators.

[HHHHH] In other words, the church is removed from any areas over which the state has control.

[IIIII] Problems result from the other extreme as well. In many Islamic countries, the church has taken over control of the state. This leads also to dictatorship. Both forms of dictatorship exalt External over Internal. In state-sponsored dictatorship, force gives way to brute force. In church-driven dictatorship, revealed 'truth' is reinforced through Mercy importance and idolatry.

[JJJJJ] I am not suggesting that all lawyers are liars. However, most have changed their focus from preserving the rule of law to promoting special interest groups and ‘needy’ individuals. In addition, the cost of going to court has become so high that only the wealthy can afford ‘justice.’ Whatever the cause, conscience is the victim.

[KKKKK] Why? Because it is using the methods of the ‘enemy.’

[LLLLL] While difficult, it will not be impossible—if the Holy Book itself is logical. A believer can still choose to study the Book while ignoring the irrational mysticism of those who claim to teach this Book. The emotional struggle involved in untangling the concepts of the Book from the words of those who 'believe' in the Book can actually be sufficient to push a person through personal transformation.

[MMMMM] Notice the role played by reasonableness. Automatic Perceiver strategy is being filled with information and this is guiding peoples’ decisions and responses.

[NNNNN] As if disbelief in evolution leads automatically to belief in creation. This assumes that the choice is either no Personal God combined with totally random processes, or else a Personal God who directly controls everything. However, I think that we can conclude by now that both of these viewpoints describe very simplistic images of ‘God.’

[OOOOO] Notice the exact connection. There is no direct relationship between the state and evolution. Instead, social transformation created science and technology, which built up the state and created the mental image of a ‘God’ of evolution.

[PPPPP] As we shall see later, this impersonal ‘God’ will eventually acquire frightening, personal overtones. Meanwhile, 'belief' in an impersonal ‘God’ leaves a personal spiritual vacuum that is filled with all sorts of passing minor cults and religious fads.

[QQQQQ] In other words, we will look at the historical juxtapositions which implicitly led people to assume that scientific thought was possible.

[RRRRR] Those of you who are familiar with Toynbee will notice that I am again drawing extensively from his research.

[SSSSS] As long as people are working on assumptions, then mental roadblocks will prevent progress from occurring. The only way to get past an existing roadblock is to fulfil the requirements that lie behind the assumptions. But, that means using active thought to question the very basis of society—a price which very few are willing to pay.

[TTTTT] This occurred during the sixth century BC.

[UUUUU] The Talmud was written after the destruction of the temple in AD 70. However, most of the original thinking behind this written work occurred during the period of history which this section is examining.

[VVVVV] In mental terms, forced inactivity prevents Exhorter strategy from finding excitement in the world of Mercy experiences. Therefore, it eventually discovers that Teacher theories can also be exciting.

[WWWWW] Intuitive thought goes beyond the here and now and jumps to conclusions, grand ideas, and big pictures. An image of ‘God’ is, by definition, the greatest conclusion, the biggest picture, and the grandest idea.

[XXXXX] A nameless God is a contradiction for revealed 'truth.' That is because written revelation uses words to build an internal image of ‘God.’ Therefore, if the ‘essence’ of God’ is non-verbal, then it cannot become linked to a Holy Book. And because a book is so closely associated with Perceiver meanings, ‘God’ also tends to become separated from Perceiver logic. In that case, the image of ‘God’ will probably become connected, in Zen fashion, with Server action that is spontaneous and unthinking—the ritual and tradition for which Judaism is famous. The end result is an absence of Perceiver ‘glue’ to tie S/N together.

[YYYYY] I am deliberately mixing I/E and S/N terminology here. The reason for this will become clear in a few pages.

[ZZZZZ] Unless they first integrate both T/F and P/J.

[AAAAAA] One other major hindering factor existed: the question of holiness. We will look at this topic in a few pages.

[BBBBBB] Today’s climate of multiculturalism likes to ignore Christianity in favor of other religions, just as a rebellious teenager tries to pretend that his parents don’t exist. The fact remains that science and technology came to birth in a Judeo-Christian civilization, and that science and technology have taken over the world. Therefore, the entire globe is now connected in some way to the family of Christendom, and the Jews and the Greeks are the parents of this family.

[CCCCCC] Constantinople was taken over in 1453.

[DDDDDD] The Orthodox church places a huge emphasis upon religious images and icons. This shows that it fixates almost entirely upon emotional Mercy experiences and not the Perceiver facts that come from these experiences. Therefore, it easily sees itself as a branch of the state. As for Islam, we all know how closely it links church and state.

[EEEEEE] This type of thinking is known as Scholasticism. It uses Perceiver logic to analyze revealed 'truth.'

[FFFFFF] These were the mental consequences. The physical effects were often much more traumatic. But then, emotional 'facts' always lead to personal pain and suffering—even for ‘chosen’ people, right?

[GGGGGG] Slavery and serfdom were both concentrated in Eastern Europe, where science did not take off. Western slavery became prevalent after the birth of science, when the ‘industry’ of black slave labor emerged.

[HHHHHH] Guilds also had the downside of preventing knowledge from spreading. However, they were a major step up from slavery. By the way, I suggest that a guild differs from a union. The bottom line for a guild is preservation of knowledge. In contrast, the main focus of a union is job protection and wages. The first deals with natural law, the second with approval.

[IIIIII] These ‘rules’ were probably based in Mercy importance, but they did have Perceiver stability.

[JJJJJJ] In the same way that Perceiver facts bring stability to Mercy experiences, so Server actions add stability to Teacher theories. Therefore, if a person always performs a limited set of Server actions, then his Teacher theories will center around these actions. And, because the human body cannot directly sense Teacher emotion, there will be nothing to pull Teacher thought out of this mental rut.

[KKKKKK] But didn’t I just say that today’s challenge is integrating T and F? Yes, both possibilities are present, and our future depends upon how we will respond to these choices. While society is presently facing the I/E split, the response of individuals to the T/F split will determine the path which society takes in integrating I/E. Read on and I will explain.

[LLLLLL] This is a concept that appeals to the Contributor person. Given a plan, he will find ways of using personal decision to alter elements of this plan. This is also the approach which I am taking.

[MMMMMM] Remember that I/E is a secondary split that depends upon the primary split of S/N. Therefore, it makes sense to compare these two.

[NNNNNN] T/F and P/J, in contrast, are right hemisphere divisions.

[OOOOOO] A good example is the response of the American government to drug abuse. By definition, this is an internal problem, because drugs are taken solely for the mental effects that they produce. However, the American state insists upon using armed force—the ultimate expression of external means—to suppress the productionand transportation of narcotics.

[PPPPPP] We are focusing upon the Western state, because it is there that science and technology emerged—not in an Asian city, Islamic town, African village or Native longhouse. In addition, the Western institution of democracy has become the ideal for most governments worldwide.

[QQQQQQ] As I mentioned in a previous footnote, if Server strategy repeats a limited set of actions, this will create in Teacher thought a corresponding set of ‘general’ Teacher theories, which Teacher strategy will find emotionally attractive.

[RRRRRR] As I mentioned in a previous footnote, if Server strategy repeats a limited set of actions, this will create in Teacher thought a corresponding set of ‘general’ Teacher theories, which Teacher strategy will find emotionally attractive.

[SSSSSS] If the doctrine of ‘the rapture’ were associated with rational thought, then believers would focus upon building an internal mental structure that would be capable of surviving contact with the real external world—the sort of thing that I am attempting to do with the theory of mental symmetry. After all, how can the internal be instantly externalized unless something exists within the internal that is capable of being externalized? Instead, most ‘thinking’ about ‘the rapture’ focuses either on the predicament of those who are ‘left behind’ or else finds excitement in contemplating the chaos that would be caused by having millions of people instantly disappear.

[TTTTTT] But what about the Catholic Church? Compared to the typical Protestant group, it places a lower emphasis upon revealed 'truth.' Therefore, its members generally find it more difficult to develop Perceiver thought. In addition, its organizational structure is far more rigid and developed. Thus, it contains a stronger S/N split. On the other hand, those who have less blind 'faith' naturally find it easier to break free of the intellectual straitjacket of religious dogma.

[UUUUUU] It is interesting to note that the early church went through several major splits over precisely this issue. I should emphasize also that we are not dealing here with the question of whether Jesus Christ really was or is God. That is a theological issue. Instead, we are looking at the mental effect which such a belief would have upon the S/N split.

[VVVVVV] I feel justified in focusing upon Christianity because we are examining the S/N split, and Christianity is the only major religion that preaches the doctrine of Incarnation. In contrast, the Islamic Quran repeatedly states that the very concept of an incarnation is blasphemy. Hinduism takes the S/N split and sets it in stone by dividing humans into a permanent caste system based upon teaching and doing. Buddhism, as we have seen, teaches that ‘God’ has no connection whatsoever with the realm of physical sensation. Zen, as we shall see in a later book, ‘bridges’ S/N through the mind game of pretending that specific actions are the same as universal concepts. As for Judaism, it tends to equate the concept of incarnation with the ‘heretical upstart’ of Christianity, and therefore treats the whole issue with great suspicion.

[WWWWWW] Joseph, the father of Jesus, was a carpenter. In Romans times, this was a technical job. Jesus began preaching at the age of thirty. Before then, he probably worked with his father.

[XXXXXX] Yes, pardon the religious heavies. But, we do know how mental images are formed and how mental constructs acquire ‘life.’ While a set of memories may become ‘alive’ at a specific point in time, growth of this mental network definitely takes time, and the form and nature of this mental ‘lifeform’ will change and mature massively over time.

[YYYYYY] The best? Well, if the goal is for human individuals to integrate S and N, then what better doctrinal tool can there be than the belief that S and N were integrated completely in the form of a human individual? On the other hand, it is always possible to integrate S/N as a group—the path which we are attempting to avoid.

[ZZZZZZ] Why is Perceiver confidence the ‘glue’? Because, Perceiver facts build connections. Why isn’t Server confidence mentioned? Because blundering through a physical world in a physical body naturally teaches Server confidence. Besides, remember that we are dealing with left hemisphere splits which can only be integrated by building right hemisphere connections.

[AAAAAAA] But what if there is no real God? It does not matter. Research will only become a valid candidate for extending E into I if it builds its internal structure around strong Teacher and Mercy feelings. When this happens, then a mental image of ‘God’ automatically emerges. As long as research remains atheistic, it cannot bridge E and I. Of course, if small-minded researchers remain ‘atheistic’ or at best ‘agnostic,’ we can always allow our civilization to die, go through an extended dark age, and then have our successors come up with the solution…

[BBBBBBB] This is a natural byproduct of basing thought in Mercy defining experiences. Such a mind must preserve its emotional absolutes at all costs. In contrast, mental cause and effect states that all emotional experiences have a cause and suggests that emotional reprogramming is possible.

[CCCCCCC] Including time, by definition, adds Server confidence. Thus, both Perceiver and Server confidence are necessary for lasting mental ‘life.’

[DDDDDDD] Contributor strategy is responsible for generating internal choice. Thus, when psychology denies free will, it is killing Contributor thought. Who would do this? A warped Facilitator person.

[EEEEEEE] My main ‘weekend job’ is playing violin in semi-professional orchestras (because they are semi-professional, union membership is not required). It takes skill, practice, and effort to put on a quality performance.

[FFFFFFF] If you want to see Sensing without any added iNtuition, look at the typical Server person. His actions lack the extra ‘something’ that causes one to be noticed by others—and this is a prerequisite for an entertainer.

[GGGGGGG] Or, a communist regime which has turned into a fascist dictatorship.

[HHHHHHH] We will look at the identity of this ‘goddess’ in a few more pages.

[IIIIIII] See. I told you that we would tie these two concepts together.

[JJJJJJJ] If someone states that something is ‘physically impossible,’ he is asserting that this aspect of Sensing can never be altered by iNtuition. But, we are continually using iNtuitive thought to help us to perform activities which previous generations considered impossible. It is the process of trying to do something that ‘cannot be done’ which bridges S/N. What is it that distinguishes genius from insanity, when following this path? Perceiver logic. Without proper Perceiver ‘glue,’ S and N cannot stick together. That is why we are trying to follow Perceiver logic wherever it leads.

[KKKKKKK] Notice the symmetry. We saw previously that the S/N split causes a split in personal identity. Here we see that the T/F division leads to a dichotomy for an image of ‘God.’

[LLLLLLL] By pointing this out, I also run the risk of being written off as blind and stupid.

[MMMMMMM] By limiting the application of his Perceiver absolutes, the 'believer' demonstrates that he is following 'truth' and not truth.

[NNNNNNN] Any theory of increasing order and complexity is, by definition, driven by Teacher emotions.

[OOOOOOO] For my fourth year project in Electrical Engineering, I and a few others put together a primitive robot—back in the days of the 6502 8-bit processor. The puny results that we achieved—after much effort—gave me incredible respect for the complexity of the human body.

[PPPPPPP] In mental terms, this change from individual to group leads to what I call a ‘flipping of modes.’ In essence, Exhorter strategy abandons practical mode for intellectual thought.

[QQQQQQQ] Therefore, a combination of evolution and self-denial can give comfort to both me’s.

[RRRRRRR] But what about those who are suffering terribly? Isn’t it better for them to die? Lasting pain may be dreadful, but at least it is conceivable. Personal annihilation, in contrast, is inconceivable.

[SSSSSSS] “But,” says the religious fundamentalist, “I know that I am going to heaven when I die.” He may 'know,' but is this knowledge based in rational thought or is it simply an expression of blind 'faith'? If we are clever enough not to build nuclear power plants on earthquake fault lines, then surely we should know better than to build our personal existence upon the shifting sands of blind 'trust.'

[TTTTTTT] We will discuss the INFP and entertainment immediately after this next section.

[UUUUUUU] Why do I include these personal details? Because, when the topic of study is the human mind, then rational thought cannot be assumed. It must be acquired.

[VVVVVVV] The first volume describes this relationship in detail.

[WWWWWWW] His mind is forming images about their selves.

[XXXXXXX] The Perceiver person finds this especially difficult because he has no conscious control over concentration. Like a rider trying to stay on a wild horse, he attempts to retain conscious control even as his mental attention is being dragged here and there by emotional pressure.

[YYYYYYY] Yes, yes. The same complaints could be made about the material in this book. But, when idolatry rules, then personal feelings cannot be trusted. And, when doing is no longer an option, then one has to follow logic regardless of doability. What other choice is there?

[ZZZZZZZ] This is like the distinction between talking and acting. Speech does involve some physical movement—you have to flap your lips and waggle your tongue. This is minimal, though, compared to normal action.

[AAAAAAAA] I say ‘Protestant church’ because it combines an external Holy Book with internal fervor. Thus, it most purely follows INFP processing.

[BBBBBBBB] Notice how the individual responds passively to societal change. In contrast, the individual who experiences personal transformation builds a new internal world and then uses this mental foundation as an auxiliary for changing external reality. Passive change leaves a person imprisoned within the MBTI® categories. In contrast, active growth moves a person beyond the ‘minimal life’ of MBTI®.