Thinkers vs. Feelers
I have been following a thread on the 9/12 Project with interest. A courageous poster calling himself “mcdonsco” has been engaged in a fool’s mission of trying to get the Piously Correct (PC) Christians to notice the PR disaster their insistence on interjecting their piety into the political arena has been and continues to be. He correctly points out that the purpose for that forum is to champion the cause of individual Liberty and a return to the limited government our Founders enshrined in our Constitution, which, after all, is a secular document establishing a secular government. By his lights (and mine), one’s religious beliefs and moral preferences are private matters, which should not enter into public debate over politics. He has tried every way imaginable to explain how the Christian Right’s PC agenda is a turnoff to so many who would otherwise find affinity with the conservative principles of less governmental interference in our daily lives. Among the PC, it falls on deaf ears, and no matter how often he protests to the contrary, he is perceived as attacking their cherished beliefs.
Since I have wasted untold time and effort on similar efforts among dogmatic ideologues on both the Left and the Right, it pains me to have to tell him that he is wasting his time. The problem is that he is thinking while his intended audience is feeling, and they just can’t understand each other. Alas, while some people prefer logic and critical thinking to evaluate an idea, the majority’s first sort is, “How does this make me feel?” Not that feelers can’t think, or thinkers can’t feel, when enticed to do so; but we each have a default preference, and the feelers are in the majority.
Another interesting factor is that thinkers tend to prefer to rely on their own wits, live an independent existence, take entrepreneurial risks, and accept responsibility for the consequences of their failures. They tend not to seek or rely on leaders for direction, and do not generally find causes or identity politics compelling. They can be good neighbors when permitted to interact on a value for value exchange basis; but they will logically place the survival of self and family above that of any group.
Feelers are more sociable, prefer the security of groups of simpatico friends, and readily follow the direction of group leaders. Their need to belong makes them vulnerable to groupthink, and susceptible to the notion that the group is more important than any individual. Thus, they are easily persuaded to accept the ideology of altruism – that they must be their brother’s keeper, that they must share alike, and that selfish thoughts are sinful. They readily join causes and accept the premise that it is OK to compel the cooperation and behavioral conformity of any individual, for the good of their notion of “society.”
When viewing the American political spectrum as a Left/Right line, one finds the altruists at both extremes. On the Left are the Politically Correct (PC) followers of Marx et al, who buy the “from each according to his ability; to each according to his need” dogma. On the Right are the Piously Correct (PC) followers of Christ et al, who buy the dogma that they are their brother’s keeper. While they disagree with each other over acceptable moral behavior and the nature of “sin,” they both see government as the instrument that must be used to compel proper behavior of all citizens, to achieve their notion of a proper cooperative society organized around their PC principles.
Naturally, the individualist “selfish” thinkers are arrayed in the middle of the spectrum, and disdained by both PC camps, who find them impossible to shame into their “selfless” altruistic mindsets. While they are sworn enemies of each other’s group, the rogue rugged individualist who eschews both camps, is almost a worse threat to the ordered society they both prefer. Neither is willing to concede that our Founders were correct to establish a minimal secular government, designed to free individuals from the tyranny of the state and/or the tyranny of the church, so we might live our lives as we choose to live them.
The epic battle between the moralizing PC Left and PC Right is tearing our country asunder over personal morality matters that have no place in politics and discussions of matters of state. The only hope we have is for the thinkers to somehow get through to the feelers that we are a secular nation of free individuals, willing to cooperate with each other in a capitalistic economic system, which rejects the notion that a mythical Robin Hood was a hero or that any guru has a lock on morality. John Galt is my hero, and he was the most moral character ever penned: “I swear by my life and my love for it – that I shall never live for the needs of another man – nor expect another man to live for mine.” â—„Daveâ–º
