Programmer’s Guide to the Mind Part 5

Contents

More on Teacher Strategy

We have spent some time examining the interaction between Teacher strategy and other mental modes. Let us turn our attention now back to Teacher thought itself.

The Storage Shed of Teacher Thought

When we looked at Mercy and Perceiver thought, I suggested that each of the four simple styles has an internal world in the front of the brain, and an associated ‘storage shed’ of automatic thought located in the back.

Teacher thought, being one of the four simple styles, also comes equipped with this deluxe feature. The Teacher storage shed, however, has nothing to do with facts or experiences: The Teacher person, especially the male,often finds it quite difficult, in fact, to remember personal details about his childhood. Instead, the Teacher storage shed is filled with words, lines, curves, patterns, and theories—it contains anything which has to do with sequences and order within complexity. Ask the Teacher person what he said, when, and to which person and he should be able to recall fairly well, especially if the conversation related to his understanding. Ask him what he ate for lunch two days ago and he probably has totally forgotten.

We saw how the Mercy storage shed allows the Mercy person to assemble experiences in unusual and original ways, leading to the behavior which I call ‘doctoring.’ Similarly, the storage shed of Teacher thought turns the Teacher person into the original thinker. The intellectual Contributor or the Facilitator philosopher often tries to pretend that his thoughts are original, but this is usually not the case. The Contributor person is much better at improving the ideas of someone else than at coming up with his own concepts, and the philosophy of the Facilitator person is invariably a product of his age, a synthesis of elements already existing within his intellectual environment. In contrast, the Teacher person really is capable of coming up with theories which are truly new, and not just improved or rehashed. For instance, when we look at the history of modern science, the two figures who possibly had more of a lasting impact than any other scientists were Isaac Newton and Albert Einstein. Both of these individuals were responsible for creating paradigm shifts—they introduced totally different and novel ways of approaching the natural world. And, both of these individuals were Teacher persons.

Even the theory of the mind presented in this book was conceived in its initial aspects by my brother, a Teacher person. I never would have originated it. My strength lies in developing and expanding an already existing thought structure, not in generating something out of absolutely nothing. While only time will tell the impact of this theory, I have just described how it has totally revolutionized my own way of thinking.[A]

The Teacher person may be capable of original thought, but I suggest that he will only reach his mental potential if he goes to the trouble of filling his mental storage shed with information that is useful and meaningful.[B]

First, the Teacher storage shed will only be of assistance to the extent that it is filled with raw material. This is not as simple as it sounds. Life is constantly bombarding us with Mercy experiences. As a result, the Mercy storage shed fills up easily and quickly. In contrast, Teacher order is usually something which has to be mined from the soil of common existence; seldom is it lying around on the surface waiting to be picked up.

It is especially difficult for the Teacher person, who livesin a mental ‘room’ that responds emotionally to order or chaos, to learn new information. When one of his theories crumbles, he really feels this as an emotional attack. It hurts—just like a cruel gesture to a Mercy person. As a result, when the average Teacher person discovers some crumb of intellectual order, he clings to it in the same way that the Mercy child clutches on to a security blanket. When the Teacher person finally does manage to build for himself some mental structure, he often responds by crawling into this little castle in the air and then closing the gates and pulling up the drawbridge so that his tiny kingdom of order will not be disturbed by the hordes of chaos lurking about him. Content within his tiny domain, the Teacher person then walks around wearing the smile of a Zen master, satisfied that he has achieved general understanding.

This reminds one of the Mercy child who ‘clings to his mother’s apron strings.’ In the same way that the young Mercy person is shy about new experiences, so the Teacher person can be intellectually ‘shy.’ The cause in both cases is the same—a bare storage shed combined with an inadequate internal world. The Mercy person generally makes it past his stage of shyness. Emotional experiences associated with his physical body barge their way into his internal world of identification, and force him to protect his personal identity by constructing a comprehensive internal world. Normal life in this way suffices to fill the Mercy room, back and front, with a deluge of the bits and pieces of experience. In contrast, the Teacher person may never graduate beyond that initial stage of shyness. This is because discovery of emotional significance in a general Teacher theory is a step-by-step process of gradually weaving together bits of complexity into an ordered fabric of integrated understanding.

This leads to a type of Catch-22 for the Teacher person. Because he does not want his internal world of understanding to collapse, he ignores information which is ‘outside of his domain’—facts which might attack his theory and give emotional pain to his Teacher thought. However, as long as he continues to suppress his intellectual environment, his storage shed remains devoid of content. Therefore, any theories which he does construct will not have a very big Teacher emotion, because he does not have very many individual pieces to work with, and strong Teacher feeling comes only when many different bits of complexity are combined into an integrated whole. The end result is that the ‘general’ theory of the Teacher person usually remains quite tiny and vulnerable.[C]

Therefore, we continually see the curious paradox of a Teacher person—a natural thinker—who refuses to think. In terms of our analogy, what point is there in his going out to the storage shed, finding a dozen tools and putting them in order? What Teacher emotion is there in that? On the other hand, arranging the contents of a warehouse full of various implements would give Teacher strategy some strong feelings—now there would be order within complexity. However, Teacher thought never arrives at this stage if it refuses to allow anything new into the storage shed because of a fear that this novelty might disrupt the way in which the existing ‘dozen tools’ are arranged. Now you can see why the average Teacher person seldom excels in history. He is so afraid of the emotional risk involved in expanding his theories that he seldom thinks unless he is forced to do so.

The second requirement for the Teacher storage shed, after a need for raw material, is usefulness. If the Teacher person is to be successful in coming up with new general theories, he must fill his mental storage shed with information which is appropriate, just as the Mercy person must absorb real experiences about the real world if he wishes to come up with new and unique approaches to his environment. Trying to build a house when the storage shed contains only gardening tools is rather difficult. Similarly, the Teacher person will find it very hard to build theories if none of his mental bits and pieces are designed for the job.

Unfortunately, this again is exactly the situation in which the average Teacher person finds himself. What he really needs is general theories about life—understanding which can help me to survive its journey through messy existence. However, it is exactly in these areas that the Teacher person finds it hardest to think: He evaluates theories emotionally, and when he encounters subconscious Mercy thought and Mercy emotion, he regards it as an alien way of feeling which is trying to disturb his way of thinking. When emotions are being torn to and fro by personal Mercy feelings, then the Teacher person literally loses his ability to think clearly. If he encounters a good emotion, is it because he has discovered order, or because he has triggered some pleasant Mercy experience? Or, if he is hit suddenly by emotional pain, is his theory in danger or did he stumble across some submerged Mercy hurt? He has no sure way of knowing. Therefore, the Teacher person usually plays it safe and restricts his theorizing to the sanitized world of the objective, in which his thinking will not be warped by strange feelings. That is, the Teacher person usually constructs a ‘castle in the air’—a building which is totally disconnected from real life and personal feelings.[D]

Add now the fact that the Teacher person usually acquires the raw materials for thinking by reading what others have thought in the past. They were objective, he also prefers to remain objective, and that is the way it stays. It takes great courage, initiative, and extended dedication by some individual, somewhere, to gain tools for Teacher thought which are even moderately useful.

Finally, I suggest that the Teacher storage shed becomes most serviceable when it contains elements which have appropriate emotional labels. This also is a major problem. Some of you may be wondering at this point, “What does he mean by putting an emotional label on ideas and theories? I didn’t know that ideas and feelings actually could go together.” Exactly. Now you notice what we are up against. So, let us see if we can put together some basic concepts.

Three requirements for a properly functioning Teacher ‘storage shed’:

1) It must be filled with content.

· Many Teacher persons protect their theories by avoiding content.

2) The content must be useful.

· Most Teacher persons study theories which ignore personal life.

3) The content must be labeled with a feeling for generality.

· Today’s specialists emphasize the specific and ignore the general.

The ideas and theories which most of us encounter in today’s world tend to be fragmented bits of information, almost like items in a game of Trivial Pursuit. When we need a certain concept, we go to our mental filing cabinet and pull out the correct shred of knowledge: the address or phone number of a person, the birthday and personal preferences of a friend, the shopping list for the grocery store, or the pile of papers in our IN box at work. These various bits of information acquire varying labels of Perceiver confidence—we know some things very well, in other areas we are not as certain.

The result is a complex mind, filled to bursting with unrelated facts—it suffers from a condition known as ‘infoglut.’ Often we wish that we lived in the past when times were simpler, and life had order. However, I suggest that the problem is not complexity, but rather a lack of order within the complexity. If we looked for connections between these individual items, then Teacher thought would begin to ‘see the light,’ and we would actually feel good about the complexity. When this happens, it is like the image of a bulb glowing above a person’s head. There is a sudden ‘Aha,’ things fit together, we get the big picture. The end result is a positive Teacher emotion.

This is the type of emotional label that gets attached to information lying within the Teacher storage shed—it is a feeling that relates to its generality. Each Teacher item acquires an emotion corresponding to the number of other items which it can explain. Something which gives order to many elements will feel quite good, whereas an isolated bit of information evokes no emotion. This labeling makes it much easier for Teacher thought to come up with new theories. When the Teacher person reaches back into his storage shed for some explanation which can give order to his environment, he will automatically be ‘handed’ ideas and theories which ‘feel right’—general concepts which have succeeded in explaining other elements.

Gnats and Elephants

Let us see what happens when theories are not labeled correctly. Without a feeling for generality, the thinking of the Teacher person might well be described as ‘interpreting the elephant in the light of the gnat.’ In terms of ‘weightiness,’ an elephant is much more meaningful than a gnat. One would think that the best system of order would place the gnat somewhere upon the elephant, rather than inserting herds of elephants, less successfully, into the carcass of a solitary gnat. Unfortunately, however, this describes the state of Teacher thinking in many of us. Without a sense of generality to guide us, we are unable to distinguish elephants from gnats; and since life usually contains many more gnats than elephants, we end up choosing some nasty little gnat as the basis for our general theory; and then, when we stumble across an elephant which refuses to fit into our narrow little world of thought, we declare that all thinking is in vain.

I suggest that there are two basic reasons why we give elevated status to such tiny ‘creatures.’ First, there is the influence of Mercy emotion. What we feel is the sum of Mercy and Teacher feelings; it is often difficult for us to distinguish between the two. Because our physical bodies give Mercy mode such a head start in learning how to feel, Teacher thought can find it very difficult to catch up. If Teacher strategy encounters some theory with a strong emotion, this feeling could be due to the generality of the concept, or it could be the result of some emotional Mercy situation which has attached itself to the Teacher idea.

The Teacher person would never choose to describe elephants in terms of gnats, but if he received a nasty bite from a gnat, he might become emotionally convinced that this gnat really was the size of an elephant: “You should have seen the creature that bit me. It had wings the size of a small jetliner. One bite from that critter took a chunk out of me the size of a silver dollar.” This sounds funny in real life, but I suggest that something similar often occurs within the internal world of Teacher thought, especially when this strategy is subconscious, as it is in those of us who are not Teacher persons.[E]

Second, there is the issue of specialization. If I spend twenty years working on an assembly line attaching three screws and two bolts to a piece of L-shaped metal, then my Teacher storage shed will fill up with a whole complexity of ideas and theories about screws, bolts, and L-shaped fragments of metal. As a result, automatic Teacher thought is going to think that theories which relate to screws, bolts and bits of metal are very general. By spending all of my time within a limited area of expertise, I have turned a gnat into an elephant. Of course, this illustration may be somewhat overblown, but specialization does have a way of warping our thinking: The psychologist gives a psychological explanation to everything, whereas the engineer interprets life in terms of scientific cause and effect. The entrepreneur sees an opportunity lurking behind every corner, and the politician views every individual as a potential voter to be persuaded.

So, can theories actually be divided into elephants and gnats, or does every idea carry equal weight? How does one distinguish an elephant from a gnat? In this book I am interpreting everything in terms of mental processing. This is my elephant—or is it my gnat? Other people often see my research on the mind as being highly specialized, whereas in contrast I view it as being quite general. Who is right, they or I? I suggest that the evaluation of competing theories is in some ways a case of Darwinian evolution, a matter of ‘survival of the fittest’: The organism which survives is that which is most fitted to its environment. For instance, I suggest that a universal theory based upon screws, bolts and bits of metal can be rejected quite easily, because the world does not consist of screws, bolts and pieces of metal. Rather, these comprise only a small fraction of existence. Therefore, in most situations, this theory would not be ‘suited to the environment.’

In contrast, I suggest that a general theory based upon the functioning of the human mind is general, because it applies to every situation in which people think, know, act, or respond—in other words, to all of human existence. Therefore, I suggest that it is at least an elephant, and not a gnat. However, if this theory of the mind is to be universal—if it is to overcome the other ‘elephants’—then it must be shown to be suited to the environment of those other ‘elephants.’ So far, we have only applied our theory of the mind to human thought. Can it be extended beyond this? Can it also explain the reactions of other living species? Is it consistent with natural law and the workings of the physical universe? And if necessary, could it be expanded to include any possible non-physical ‘spiritual’ world?

Now that is a tall order. For now, all I can say is that it may be possible. Initial forays into other fields of understanding suggest that there are consistencies. In terms of fractal thinking, it appears that the general principles which we have discovered about the mind also show up as features elsewhere.

One common misconception in separating gnats from elephants is the idea of rating the generality of a certain theory by the number of researchers working in that area, the number of seminars given on the topic, or the number of books written about the subject. However, it is not the number of people which is important in rating a concept, but rather the significance of their ideas. A television ad may focus the attention of millions of people on a new brand of toilet paper, but this does not turn the product into a general theory. The world does not revolve around toilet paper, despite the fact that we may wish that it did whenever we are caught without.

Teacher Generality and Subconscious Thought

Now that we have some understanding about Teacher thinking, I need to clear up a possible confusion. We are looking at howTeacher thought operates. However, the Teacher person who reads this explanation may think that it is inaccurate. I suggest that there are two reasons for this possible response. We will spend some time on the first point and then see how it leads to the second.

First, the Teacher person cannot see how he thinks. Like the Mercy individual, he lives within an isolated mental world; he cannot ‘see’ the other rooms of the house from his conscious ‘room.’ But, the thinking of his room is heavily influenced by what happens in the rest of the mind. Therefore, when we describe the operation of Teacher thought, we must include a description of mental processes which he will not notice.

I have mentioned that Teacher feelings of generality are related to repetition. When the same feature repeats itself many times, the result is positive Teacher emotion. This is how I as a Perceiver person would describe Teacher emotion. It also explains, from my viewpoint, the subconscious processing which is occurring within the mind of the Teacher person—he is unable to see it, but it is responsible for creating his good feelings.

When building a general theory, the Teacher person does not look consciously for repetition. Instead, he finds some attractive memory within Teacher thought and attempts to hold on to it, in the same way that Mercy strategy wants to preserve experiences which are pleasant. This ‘attractive memory’ becomes a potential theory. In order to test it, Teacher strategy moves around to different areas of the mind while ‘holding on’ to his intellectual ‘possession.’ If he succeeds in mentally grasping this potential theory while accessing other memories, then it becomes a more general theory which explains those other memories.[F] The result is positive Teacher emotion. On the other hand, if he is unable to hold on to this memory, then he knows that his potential theory is inadequate, and the result is Teacher pain. The area of thought within which a Teacher person can hold on to a specific theory becomes the domainof that theory. In terms of our illustration, Teacher thought chooses some Teacher memory, acts as if it is an ‘elephant,’ and then tries to preserve the ‘elephant’ status of this memory while ‘walking’ around a ‘field’ of other theories.[G]

But what determines whether or not Teacher thought can hold on to a potential theory? It is the connections which are provided by the rest of the mind. If this one item links to many other memories, then Teacher strategy will find that it can continue to focus on it while looking at these other memories. On the other hand, if it does not connect to anything else, then Teacher thought will find it pulled immediately from his ‘hand’ as soon as he makes any mental movement.

We can illustrate Teacher thinking by imagining a search for money. Suppose that one wanted to discover valid currency. The Teacher approach would be like picking up a piece of paper, walking to the sales counter, and asking the clerk, “Can I buy something with this piece of paper?” Chances are the response would be, “That note is worthless. It is just a piece of garbage.” This describes the reaction that the Teacher person often provokes in others when he suggests a new possible theory. It is shot down immediately.

However, suppose that an individual happened, by chance, to pick up a store coupon. If he walked into the right location and offered his piece of potential currency, the clerk would respond by accepting his fragment of paper. The result would be positive Teacher emotion, and Teacher thought would cling to its mental possession. On the basis of Teacher feelings, our searcher would shout, “Eureka, I have found the valid currency.” Similarly, when the Teacher person does come up with a general theory, he often feels initially that he has discovered the ultimate answer for all of life.

Imagine the disappointment of our poor individual when he goes to the next store and offers his ‘valid currency.’ Instead of receiving approval, his piece of paper will be rejected.[H] The Teacher person who receives this type of response will usually react in one of two ways. First, he may restrict his intellectual world—he limits his travels to the one store where his coupon is accepted. He then lives with the illusion of a universal theory. Second, he may accept that his first theory has a limited domain, and continue his search for more ‘valid currency.’ Eventually, he will discover other store coupons, and he may even stumble across some dollar bills. Imagine the Teacher delight at discovering a universal theory—a piece of paper which is accepted everywhere.

Is Teacher thought responsible for determining the domain of his ‘currency’? No. It is the response from the stores that establishes which ‘currency’ is accepted where. Teacher strategy merely did the ‘leg work’ of testing the possible candidates. Similarly, I suggest that it is repetition which guides Teacher processing. If the same concept is repeated in many situations, then Teacher thought can visit these various locations and find its theory accepted. Teacher thought tests what is repeated by choosing a possible theory and ‘walking around’ with it.[I] Teacher strategy would notice the repetition and make conclusions about generality, as it noticed that the same ‘currency’ was accepted in many different areas.

Teacher strategy likes general theories; they feel good.

· The rest of the mind is responsible for making theories general.

· Teacher mode tests a theory by ‘holding’ it and ‘walking’ around.

· A theory which is repeated in many different contexts is general.

This leads us finally to the second reason why the Teacher person may not identify with our description of how he thinks. It may not be compatible with the general theory which he is presently holding. Therefore, his emotional response will be negative. But, can’t the Teacher person compare a new idea with his current theory? No, not if it is completely new. In order for Teacher thought to relate one theory to another, the first must already be connected in some way with the second by subconscious thought.

Therefore, learning a genuinely novel Teacher theory is a two step process. First, the new theory must be connected with the old. At this point it is important not to question the old theory. Rather, the new should be shown to be a subset of the old. For instance, suppose that our searcher for ‘currency’ was still working with store coupons and had not yet discovered real currency. One would show him, initially, that a dollar bill was like a store coupon.

Once this first hurdle had been crossed, it would then be possible to compare the new theory with the old; the Teacher person would begin to ‘walk around’ with it. If the new explanation turned out to be more general than the old, then the new would change from being a subset of the old to a superset. For instance, once our individual was convinced that money could be used as store coupons, then he could be led to areas where store coupons were rejected but money was accepted. The result would be a paradigm shift. Facts would stay the same, but a novel way of linking them would now come to the fore—a new general theory would be accepted.

That is the nice way to teach a new theory. The other option is the brute force method, which also involves two steps.[J] The first destroys the old theory. This leads to Teacher pain and intellectual hunger. Teacher strategy will then feel driven emotionally to find a new general theory, which brings us to the second step of replacing the old with something that is novel.

There is a strong correspondence between these factors and similar traits in Mercy strategy. First, notice how both Teacher and Mercy thinking and feeling are heavily influenced by mental processing provided by other modes of thought. Both Teacher and Mercy thought notice the effect of this mental meddling, but they are unaware of its source.

Second, we have defined me as the set of Mercy memories on which Mercy thought can continue to concentrate. Similarly, we can define a general Teacher theory as a set of Teacher memories on which Teacher thought can continue to concentrate. This general Teacher theory, as we would expect from symmetry with the Mercy strategy, is often associated with personal identity. Suppose an individual calls himself a carpenter, dentist, or lawyer. This word provides a general Teacher theory on which Teacher strategy can continue to concentrate. As long as the associated person acts within his profession, Teacher thought in him can continue to focus upon his theory.[K]

Third, Mercy strategy begins life by clutching on to any good experience which it encounters. Similarly, Teacher thought starts thinking by holding on to any general explanation which comes along. We saw this illustrated by the role-playing behavior of the child. He may pretend to be a fireman, a nurse, an astronaut, a mother, or a doctor. In each case, Teacher thought in the child attempts to hold on to some potential comprehensive theory of identity.

Finally, the two ways of acquiring a new general theory correspond to the two methods of transforming me. First, there is the path of patience, which is motivated by the possibility of good emotions. It starts by building a new alternative while leaving the old unchanged. For Mercy strategy, this means holding on to the old me while forming a new me. For Teacher thought, it involves building connections between the old and new general theories while continuing to concentrate upon the old one. Once the new has been finished, then a transition is made from old to new—Mercy thought jumps from the oldme to the new me; Teacher thought moves from the old theory to the new one. For Mercy strategy, this transition leads to a new identity. For Teacher thought, it means a new way of thinking, a novel worldview, a paradigm shift.

Two ways of changing a general Teacher theory:

1) The path of patience; a new theory expands upon the old.

2) The path of suffering; an old theory is destroyed, allowing the new.

These two ways corresponds to the two methods of transforming me.

Second, there is the path of suffering, which is driven by the infliction of bad emotions, and begins by attacking the old with a seemingly incurable hurt. For Mercy thought, a traumatic event strikes. Teacher strategy, in contrast, encounters some devastating blow to its understanding. The result, in both cases, is a search for answers. When a solution is discovered, then fragments of emotional identification can be reconstructed, hopefully upon a more solid foundation.

In this book we concentrate—thus far in a ‘nice’ way—upon the path followed by Mercy strategy. This is because, as humans, it is the first battle which we face for mental maturity. There is no point in discussing the second step involving Teacher strategy until we have gone through the first step of transforming me. However, as we look at this subject, remember that exactly the same general principles apply to Teacher thought, and that complete mental integration involves reprogramming both Mercy and Teacher identity.[L]

Teacher Personality and Automatic Thought

I have suggested that each of the four simple styles is equipped with a ‘storage shed’ which operates automatically. When we looked at the Mercy and Perceiver persons, we saw that this ‘storage shed’ was responsible for creating certain character traits. I would now like to look at the effect which automatic thought has upon the personality of the Teacher person.

First, I suggest that the Teacher individual has a deep need for intellectual subtlety. In order to see how this trait works, we should compare it with the Mercy person’s desire for subtlety. The Mercy individual hates to deal directly with emotional subjects—it would be like drawing a portrait by taking gobs of paint and throwing them onto the canvas. Sure, the viewer may get the picture, but the effect is so crass, so unsophisticated, so unsubtle. The Mercy person would much prefer to mix up exactly the desired shade of color and place it carefully in precisely the right place. The result is a drawing which is subtle, and which communicates a lot using a little.[M] Therefore, when the Mercy person expresses himself emotionally, he tries to pick the combination of words and experiences which will communicate the exact mix of feelings which he is sensing.

Teacher subtlety operates in a similar way. When the Teacher person is attempting to state some theory or get some concept across, he dislikes having to state all of the individual pieces in his theory, because this approach triggers overworn explanations which already are stored within automatic thought, somewhat like buying another flat-headed screwdriver when you already have 47 different flavors of generic flat-headed screwdrivers cluttering up your toolkit. It is much more subtle and elegant to find the word which conveys exactly the right shade of meaning and to use this term to communicate the idea.

For instance, when my Teacher brother was learning Hebrew, he spent countless hours memorizing esoteric words in order to gain a large vocabulary.[N] That way he could move beyond the stage of having to say things like ‘purplish-red’ and use the much more subtle term of ‘magenta.’ Sure, a person with a vocabulary of one thousand words can usually get his ideas across, but imagine having to use exactly the same simple words over and over again. Yuck.

Would you like to read this book, for instance, if I used the same words and the same groups of words again and again all the way through the book and made you read the same words all the way through the book? I think that you would not like my words and that you would stop reading this book and read another book.

Moving on to our second point, I have suggested that the Mercy person loathes insincerity. When people transmit mixed emotional messages, this presents the Mercy storage shed with conflicting information and causes its retrieval mechanism to misfire: “Who is this guy? Is he good or bad? Where is he coming from? What is he really like?”

Similarly, I suggest that the Teacher person despises double-mindedness. An individual who is double-minded shifts between conflicting theories, usually motivated by a desire to please his current ‘audience.’ His ideas have no consistency; his world view changes from moment to moment. As a result, the Teacher storage shed retrieval apparatus malfunctions; it will not know how to communicate with this person, or how to interpret his behavior. Like the Mercy person, the Teacher person will often respond to this type of situation by running away: “Get me out of here. That individual is sick in the head. His thinking is totally warped.”

The Teacher person will often have major conflicts with the Facilitatorperson over exactly this issue. The Facilitator individual, as we will see, looks at details and adapts his responses to the situation. The Facilitator person who lacks internal content does not realize that his mental fine-tuning is causing his subconscious Teacher theories to drift all over the map. The Teacher person does notice this inconsistency, and can end up abhorring [O] the unstable Facilitator as someone who is less than human.

Finally, we saw that the presence of automatic thought gives the Mercy person a desire for emotional novelty. I suggest that the same need appears within the Teacher person: He longs for new Teacher feelings. The Teacher person who goes to a party may sit on the sidelines, waiting for someone to say something significant. The whole evening may pass with him speaking scarcely a word. He wanted to converse, but everyone talked about nothing. For the whole time, the Teacher person encountered only empty concepts, meaningless specifics, worn-out ideas and poorly formed theories. Suddenly the night was over and nothing had happened; no new information had been added to the storage shed of Teacher thought. When this occurs, even the memory of the evening disappears; a week later the Teacher person cannot recall that he was there.

Traits of the Teacher person due to automatic Teacher thought:

· Intellectual subtlety. The Teacher person likes precise words.

· Single-mindedness. The Teacher person hates the double-minded.

· Novelty. The Teacher person appreciates ideas which are new.

The Mercy person may respond to a lack of emotional content by facing others with an emotional situation. However, how can the Teacher person do this, when Teacher feelings must be constructed one step at a time? How does one inject a sudden dose of Teacher emotion? Therefore, the Teacher individual may resort to intellectual sniping in an attempt to show others the emptiness of their words. His listeners, however, will usually interpret this approach as a personal attack and respond by defending their Mercy feelings. This makes the situation worse for the Teacher person. Before, he only had to deal with a lack of Teacher emotion. At least he could retreat into his own internal world of intellectual order. Now he has to contend with a frontal assault from Mercy thought and an overflowing of raw, disordered Mercy feelings. This confuses his thinking and prevents him from sniping effectively, and so he tries now to escape. Afterwards, he may not be able to sleep as he repeats over and over again in his mind, sometimes in mumbled speech, the emotional words that were spoken.[P]

It does not take many of these situations to convince the Teacher person that his best choice is to stay home and to avoid personal contact with others: “They don’t understand, and no matter what I say or do, they never will understand. Why should I cause a scene? It is better for everyone if I do not come.” This also can be misinterpreted as a form of pride or arrogance. Meanwhile, the Teacher person longs inside for some form of intellectual interaction, some meaningful exchange of theories and ideas.

The Teacher Internal World

Let us turn our attention now from automatic thinking to the internal world of Teacher strategy. When we looked at internal Mercy and Perceiver thought, we saw that both strategies were equipped with a ‘doorman’ who stood at the entrance to the internal world and decided who or what would be allowed to enter the inner sanctum of thought. The ‘doorman’ for Mercy thought is identification, while it is belief which stands guard at the gate to the inner Perceiver world.

I suggest that the ‘watchman’ which presides over the entrance to the inner Teacher world is understanding or comprehension. Whenever I understand something, a general theory moves into my inner world of Teacher thought. The act of comprehension admits that there is an order which ties together the complexity which inhabits my mind. If I understand what someone is saying, then my internal Teacher world has managed to make sense of all the words which have just been spoken to me. The parent may say to the child, “Do you understand?” The sergeant may yell at the private, “Do you understand?” The child may ask his mother, “Do you understand?” In all cases, the question is whether the appropriate general theory, composed in this case of the string of words in a sentence, has made its way into the inner world of Teacher thought.

This means that whenever a person makes a statement that a certain topic is incomprehensible, impossible to understand, or beyond human comprehension, then this indicates that the guard standing watch over the door to his inner Teacher world is holding up its hand and refusing to allow theories to enter. If, for instance, the religious person asserts that the ways of God are beyond comprehension, then we can conclude that his internal world of Teacher thought is rejecting general theories about God.

Theories enter the Teacher internal world through comprehension.

· An incomprehensible theory is a contradiction in terms.

· Contradictions make Teacher thought feel bad.

Notice that there is a difference between the statement “This topic cannot be understood,” and the complaint of “I do not understand.” In the first situation, Teacher thought is trying to prevent a general theory from entering into the internal world of thought. In the second instance, a number of Teacher theories (namely individual words) have already made their way into the inner room and Teacher strategy is having problems fitting them together. The first is a statement of rejection, a way of changing the subject. The second is a cry for help, and a plea for more information.

Pseudo-Theories

If comprehension is the ‘doorman’ to the internal Teacher world, then any general theory which states that certain topics cannot be understood is a Teacher contradiction. On the one hand, a general theory is supposed to live within the inner sanctum of Teacher thought. On the other hand, this same theory is being denied entrance to the internal world. Can something be both in and not in at the same time?

So how can a general Teacher theory get away with the oxymoron of denying general order, especially when Teacher thought feels bad whenever it is faced with contradictions? I suggest that the answer lies in Mercy emotion. Every general theory must have some emotional source; Teacher theories are, by their very nature, emotional. However, the emotions which we sense are the sum of Teacher and Mercy feelings. Therefore, the emotional source of a Teacher understanding can be provided by Mercy feelings and does not need to come from Teacher thought. The result is a Mercy focus which ties together a Teacher theory. This leads to the illusion of a general understanding: Teacher strategy is able to hold on to certain words, and these words are associated with good feelings. Therefore, Teacher thought feels as if it has a general understanding—it thinks that the ‘gnat’ is an ‘elephant’.

A pseudo-theory is like a person who puts on a mask and operating gown and acts like a medical doctor. He may look like a doctor but he is not one. Why? Because he does not have the knowledge and skills of a real physician. Similarly, Mercy-based pseudo-theories lack the content of a real theory. They can survive as long as they are not analyzed in depth. A fake physician can be unveiled by asking him questions and testing his abilities. Similarly, a pseudo-theory can be debunked by exposing it to different areas of thought and seeing if it survives. Obviously, a pretend doctor will attempt to avoid situations which uncover his lack of ability. In the same way, a pretend theory will protect its emptiness by avoiding discussion which involves content.

A pseudo-theory is an imitation general understanding.

· It is a Teacher structure with words and theories.

· Strong Mercy feelings make the Teacher elements appear general.

· It is protected by claiming that it is ‘beyond comprehension.’

But how can a discussion of understanding be avoided without admitting to a lack of understanding? The answer is simple. Remember that Teacher emotion depends upon generality. Therefore, if a pseudo-theory can claim to be above understanding, beyond logic, or a superset of rationality, then it acquires instant intellectual grandeur, and simultaneously avoids all intellectual confrontation that might unmask it.

For example, when I try to describe the theory of cognitive styles to people, the discussion usually begins upon an intellectual footing with an exchange of Teacher concepts and theories. This is because I have a theory of human thought, and the other individual has a pseudo-theory. In both cases, Teacher strategy is operating and likes to ‘walk’ from one topic to another while holding on to its possession of an understanding. However, very often a transition occurs in which the other person suddenly changes his tune and asserts, “It is impossible to comprehend the topic; after all, no one could ever understand the mind.” What has happened is that I have made the ‘mistake’ of expanding the discussion to include other fields of thought. This shows the generality of my theory and unveils the limitations of the other individual’s pseudo-theory. Why do I know that it is his theory which is inadequate? Because my theory has a larger domain. I can expand it to include many areas, whereas he must protect his ‘general’ understanding by restricting it to specific topics.

Pseudo-theories are unveiled when they are exposed to other areas of thought. But, a theory which has been exposed can still defend itself by restricting intellectual interaction, reinforcing itself with Mercy feelings, and ultimately removing itself from the source of the discomfort. How are these elusive pseudo-theories finally defeated? By removing their Mercy foundation. If the Mercy feelings which support a pseudo-theory can be belittled or destroyed, then the immature Teacher thought that is valuing them will no longer feel that it has a general understanding. As long as the Emperor can wear royal clothing and act regal, he can still feel like a king, even if he is a prisoner within his castle. However, take away his trappings, or show that the Emperor has no clothes, and the facade vanishes.

Destroying the Mercy foundation of a pseudo-theory is a risky business. There is a danger that the very act of destruction will itself become a defining Mercy experience which reinforces the theory which one is trying to destroy. For instance, many pseudo-intellectual political or religious movements have gained immortality when the founder was killed and turned into a martyr.

It is much safer to belittle the Mercy foundation of a pseudo-theory—by showing that the ‘Emperor has no clothes.’ How is this done? By developing real clothes. People will then look at the Mercy trappings of the pseudo-theory, laugh, and say, “The king is not wearing anything; doesn’t he look silly.” I suggest that technology provides an illustration of this process. Before this century, shysters and charlatans used to go around promoting universal cures, packaged as healing elixirs in colorful bottles with exotic labels. These pseudo-theories flourished until medicine, based in real Teacher understanding, came up with genuine cures and medicines rooted in scientific research. The poor quack didn’t stand a chance, and he was forced to duck out of town. The Mercy trappings, which had looked so regal before, now appeared shallow and disconnected. Without his ‘clothing,’ the poor snake-oil salesman had nothing with which to hide his intellectual nakedness.

Today, our world is full of pseudo-theories in areas of the subjective. Who knows what technology will emerge to belittle these so-called Emperors and send them running for cover, shielding their poor naked and exposed ‘bodies’ from view.[Q]

Pseudo-Cultures

We have looked at the contradiction of a general Teacher theory which denies the possibility of understanding. I suggest that it is also possible to have a Mercy culture which denies culture. Remember that culture emerges when a group of people share a common set of emotional memories within their internal Mercy worlds.[R] However, if we look at the western United States and western Canada, we find the curious situation of a culture which denies emotional involvement.[S] On the one hand, our ‘culture’ is exported all over the world, in the form of music, film, advertising, and other forms of entertainment. On the other hand, very few people in this area of the world have deep feelings, let alone an ability to share them with other individuals. How can a cultureless society export culture?

I suggest that the answer to this contradiction involves Teacher emotion. Mercy thought wants to hold on to experiences which have deep emotional content; it wants to love and to be loved. This is the basis for cultural interaction. However, if empty Mercy experiences are coated with strong Teacher feelings, then it is possible to form the illusion of culture. This creates people who, deep down, are very shallow.

This Teacher packaging is known as professionalism. Remember that Teacher emotion comes from order within complexity. Therefore, if Mercy experiences are arranged in a way that produces positive Teacher emotion, the result will be a pseudo-culture. For instance, a huge warehouse store which markets all types of goods, arranges them logically on shelves, and sells them in bulk is a pseudo-culture. Another example is a modern, complex economy which runs efficiently and smoothly. Shallow music can also be turned into a pseudo-culture if it contains the latest technogadgetry and multimedia, and is played with tight rhythms which are technically correct and free of errors. Teacher thought also loves computers, and marvels at how so many megabytes of memory, gigabytes of hard storage, and zillions of transistors can work together in harmony. I suggest that this type of superb Teacher packaging characterizes the so-called culture which North America exports. It may be Mercy garbage and vacuity, but it is professional trash, awe-inspiring emptiness.

A Teacher pseudo-theory is unveiled by bringing it into contact with competing explanations. Similarly, I suggest that a pseudo-culture can be shown up by exposing it to other cultures. Most people in the world have deep Mercy feelings. North Americans, in general, do not. North America claims to be a melting-pot, a society of immigrants in which all social backgrounds are accepted, a world where all cultures are free to express themselves openly and with emotional meaning. In actual fact, whenever we in North America encounter real feelings, we run away from them. We say to each other, “You must come over some time,” and know that we do not mean it. We savor the cuisine and art of other cultures, but we shy away from their deeper traditions, and cannot fathom the emotional convictions which motivate their behavior. And yet, we still ‘know’ that our culture is superior.

A pseudo-culture is an imitation society.

· It contains Mercy experiences, people, objects and relationships.

· Teacher feelings gives these Mercy elements emotional depth.

· It is protected by claiming to go ‘beyond culture.’

How can a pseudo-culture claim to be superior to other cultures? By stating that it goes beyond personal feelings. In the words of the American businessman: “America is the land of opportunity. We are not bound by the emotional shackles of tradition. Everything has its price. Anything can be bought and sold.” Or to quote the Canadian multiculturalist, “Canada is the land of total religious and cultural freedom. We are not bound by the shackles of any specific traditions. All religions and cultures are accepted. Any belief will be tolerated.” In this way, we give the impression that the deepest Mercy feelings can be found in an environment which, in reality, ignores all deep Mercy feelings.

It is cross-cultural contact which exposes the deficiencies of a pseudo-culture. However, it is always possible to respond by adding more professionalism. This allows the illusion of culture to continue. Therefore, the more we North Americans use objectivity and political correctness to avoid dealing with real issues, the more we make up for our Mercy emptiness by adding Teacher professionalism.

A pseudo-culture is not defeated by simply exposing its shortcomings. Rather, one must confront the Teacher foundations which lie behind the false culture and which give it emotional significance. However, I suggest that destroying the Teacher order of a pseudo-culture is just as dangerous as overturning the Mercy foundations of a pseudo-theory. This is because destruction itself creates Teacher feelings—negative ones. The painful Teacher emotions produced by disorder can continue to propel a pseudo-culture.[T] For an example, turn on the television and look at programs which depict the Teacher disorder of mayhem and destruction. They are professionally produced, with state-of-the-art technical special effects, yet they callously continue to avoid deep Mercy feelings. The repeated depictions of rape, theft, rebellion, destruction, and murder have nothing to do with Mercy subtlety and sensitivity.

I suggest that the best way to defeat a pseudo-culture is to create a better Teacher order based in deep Mercy feelings. This belittles the Teacher feelings of professionalism which add emotional weight to the empty Mercy experiences. Mercy strategy then feels the lack of culture and becomes open to an alternative.

Oh, you want an example. Well, hopefully the next few years will provide a sufficient illustration.

Teacher Instability

I have mentioned that Teacher theories make their way into the internal world of Teacher strategy through the process of understanding. As with Mercy experiences, Teacher concepts can enter this inner world either voluntarily or involuntarily. If the theories which already reside within the Teacher inner world carry sufficient emotional weight, then Teacher strategy can choose whether or not to accept a new idea. However, if a novel theory comes along which is more general than any existing Teacher understanding, then this new concept will barge its way into the internal world of Teacher thought, just as experiences with sufficiently strong feelings force themselves into the inner sanctum of Mercy thought.[U]

With Mercy thought, the big problem is learning how to deal with the barrage of emotional experiences which enter the mind, courtesy of the body. With Teacher strategy, in contrast, the major concern is gaining sufficient emotional content within the internal Teacher world to resist the constant flow of ‘flaky’ theories and half-baked ideas. In both cases, there is a problem with internal stability. In one case the external pressure is too great, while in the other, the internal level is too low.

Whenever a new general theory or concept enters the inner Teacher world, it becomes the kernel of order around which complexity accretes. Every related fact, word, action, and experience is interpreted in the light of this general understanding, and seen as another facet of this universal explanation, as Teacher thought attempts to hold on to its intellectual ‘possession.’ Each mental context has room for only one general Teacher theory—new information is either interpreted in the light of what is already known, or else it takes over and becomes the new general theory.[V]

I am sure that all of us have encountered people who seem to drift from one personal philosophy to another. Each time we meet them, they have discovered a new book, attended another seminar, or latched on to some charismatic guru or pseudo-religious organization. A conversation with them leads inevitably to their latest enlightenment: “I used to think that I had the answer until I came across this amazing volume. The author is incredible! He reads me like an open book. You know, life really makes sense now!! No more drifting around. This time I have finally discovered the ultimate answer,” and so on. At first, we may respond emotionally to their enthusiasm, either arguing against them or participating with them in their most recent adventure. However, after a few rounds of constantly changing universal solutions, we just shake our heads, shrug our shoulders, and hope that our dear ‘flaky’ friend makes it through his latest intellectual binge.

I suggest that these are symptoms of Teacher instability. Every time a new general Teacher theory is encountered, it overwhelms the existing contents of the internal Teacher world and becomes the new defining theory by which everything is explained. This ‘universal’ explanation usually dies a fairly quick death as it is torn apart by complexity which it cannot handle. This leaves the Teacher part emotionally vulnerable to the next grand idea which comes along, and the cycle repeats itself.[W]

The Teacher person can have major problems with Teacher instability. He lives in the mental room of theories and therefore must have a general explanation for whatever he encounters. As we said, the child Teacher can be the know-it-all, with a simplistic answer for everything. As an adult, he is capable of generating continual new twists to his universal explanation for life. Each adaptation of the general theory is seen as the ultimate answer, and it guides fully his words, sequences and feelings—for the next few weeks. Pity his poor marriage partner. One month, their life is mapped out completely in a certain direction. Then, the next month comes along and a totally different plan emerges full-blown, and it is followed with equal emotional fervor.

If those around the unstable Teacher person try to maintain some emotional distance, the Teacher person may interpret this response as double-mindedness, and react by pulling back emotionally. Unfortunately, whenever there is conflict between people, Mercy feelings usually enter into the picture. This Mercy well of emotions will confuse the thinking of the Teacher individual, and his natural response will be to avoid Mercy situations which trigger these unwanted feelings. The result is that he breaks off physical contact with any individuals who do not enter fully into his current ‘understanding.’ This can lead to a rather lonely existence.

Both Mercy and Teacher thought can suffer from instability.

· Unstable people give their feelings fully to the latest infatuation.

These two styles need subconscious structure to gain stability.

· Perceiver facts make Mercy experiences and identity more solid.

· Server skills anchor Teacher theories and understanding.[X]

Those who live within the intellectual sphere of the Teacher person may in turn be controlled by a form of emotional dictatorship. In the same way that the Mercy person can use emotional manipulation to set the standards for ‘love,’ so the Teacher individual may restrict the flow of ideas as a way of controlling ‘understanding.’

Mercy dictatorship works best with family and close friends. This is because a Mercy person can only use emotional pressure to manipulate the behavior of another individual when there are personal ties of love and friendship between them. Those who are emotionally attached to the Mercy person experience the internal twisting and turning of approval being given and withheld. Those who are outside of the family often wonder how a certain Mercy person could be viewed as a ‘dictator’: “But she is such a nice, loving person; so kind and considerate.” [Y]

Similarly, the Teacher ‘dictator’ only has control over intellectual partners—individuals who have had the emotional Teacher pleasure of exchanging general Teacher theories with the Teacher person. Once this Teacher link of feeling has been established, then the Teacher person who senses double-mindedness can manipulate his partner by withholding the flow of concepts, just as the Mercy person manipulates his ‘friends’ by restricting the flow of ‘love.’ The intellectual partner who attempts to hold on to his own ideas without bowing automatically to the latest general concepts from the Teacher person may find himself cut off completely from verbal interaction.[Z]

Historians indicate that this process happened several times, for instance, in the life of Sigmund Freud.[AA] When members of his inner circle, such as Adler or Jung, came up with their own version of his ideas, then Freud eventually responded by making them leave. In his eyes, they had rejected Teacher understanding and therefore were found wanting. He was the ‘true psychologist’ and would only interact with those who practiced ‘true psychology.’

When we looked at Mercy thought, I suggested that there were three reasons why the Mercy person tended to think that his definitions for ‘love’ should apply to the rest of the world. I suggest that the same three reasons can also convince the Teacher person that he has a corner on ‘understanding.’

First, there is the emotional reason. The Teacher person feels good when his concepts fit together, and senses emotional pain when they fall apart. When my personal feelings are sufficiently potent, it is easy to forget that there are other individuals in the world with their own emotions. Thus, the Teacher person who discovers a new general theory or faces a major crisis in understanding can end up focusing completely upon his own intellectual environment, to the exclusion of any other feelings. Of course, we all do this to some extent, but the Teacher person lives within the room of understanding. When his world of ideas turns upside-down, then he goes topsy-turvy.

Second, not only does the Teacher person live within the mental room of understanding, but he is unable to ‘see’ into any of the other parts of the mind. Just as the Mercy person is locked within the world of experiences, so the Teacher individual sees nothing except Teacher theories. Unless an explanation can in some way be formulated, therefore, in terms of current Teacher order within complexity, the Teacher person simply will not notice it, in the same way that the Mercy person will have real problems grasping a concept without the help of some concrete example. The result is that the Teacher person is constantly plaguing himself and others with the question “Why?” [BB]

Finally, like the Mercy individual, the Teacher person has the ability to concentrate. The Teacher individual can focus on an idea and block out distractions. His body may be sitting in the middle of a crowded room, but his mind can be anywhere. When he decides to fixate upon some memory in Teacher thought, then the subconscious parts of his mind are forced to follow. The Perceiver and Server persons, as we shall see, do not have this natural talent of concentration. Instead, their thoughts are constantly being dragged here and there as their subconscious Teacher and Mercy strategies decide to focus on some theory or some experience. It is only as these subconscious rooms begin to function properly that the Perceiver and Server persons gain the ability to guide their own thoughts. The Teacher and Mercy persons, in contrast, can use conscious control to direct concentration, even when other mental rooms are only partially developed.[CC] Their thoughts gain in quality as they allow subconscious mental rooms to be programmed.

The combination of emotional involvement, blindness to the rest of the mind, and concentration makes it easy for the Teacher person to develop a general theory, hold on to it, and then ignore the rest of the world. In the extreme, this leads to the ivory castle mentality: The Teacher person builds a piece of order, crawls into it and closes the door upon his environment.

This brings us to the end of our discussion of the Teacher person. People sometimes view the Mercy individual as a bundle of tumbling emotions and experiences and I suggest that this is the case when Perceiver facts do not give stability to Mercy experiences. Similarly, I have probably given you the impression that the Teacher person is a pile of half-baked concepts and I suggest that this is also true—when Teacher strategy operates alone, without assistance from the rest of the mind. However, in the same way that Perceiver thought can turn the ‘liquid’ of Mercy experience into a connected ‘solid,’ so we will see later that Serverthought is capable of stabilizing the ‘froth and air’ of Teacher theories and ideas.

Teacher Strategy and the Brain

Locating Teacher strategy in the brain is both easy and difficult. Let us begin with the easy part and look at words and speech—the basic building blocks of Teacher thought.

As I mentioned earlier, brain researchers have known for over one hundred years that there are two areas in the brain which are required for speech. One of these regions is called Wernicke’s area, and is located in the left temporal lobe, which I suggest contains automatic Teacher thought. If this part of the brain is damaged, a person is unable to come up with specific words. Overall sentence structure remains intact, but speech lacks content. The other location necessary for speech is Broca’s area, in the left inferior frontal cortex, which I suggest is used for the Teacher internal world. Brain damage here also leads to specific symptoms. In this case, the patient remembers and comprehends most individual words, but cannot combine these fragments of speech into complete sentences.

Let me summarize. Specific words—the basic form of Teacher theories—are stored at the back of the brain in the automatic part of Teacher strategy. The internal Teacher world in the front of the brain assembles these individual words into sentences and higher concepts.

Analyzing the connection between Teacher processing and brain speech centers is easy. Finding neurological evidence for other aspects of Teacher thought is more difficult. I suggest that there is a simple reason for this. Apart from the domain of words and speech, Teacher processing is a foreign concept to most people. The average individual does not take time to build general Teacher theories. Therefore, if Teacher mode is usually undeveloped, then obviously neurology will not notice its lack, when some region of the brain is damaged. How can you find, or lose, something which never was there in the first place?

Nevertheless, some evidence does exist. For instance, “studies have suggested that the left frontal lobe may be specialized for processing positive affective [emotional] stimuli and the right frontal lobe may be specialized for negative affective stimuli.” 13 This, I suggest, describes the relationship between Teacher and Mercy thought in the typical individual. Mercy strategy, responsible for right hemisphere emotion, is troubled with feelings of guilt and inadequacy. The person then compensates for this right hemisphere pain by finding some philosophy which can comfort the mind with the positive feelings of a general Teacher understanding.[DD] This interpretation is backed up by another finding. Researchers have discovered that the left inferior frontal cortex is underactive in many depressed patients, and that when the depression leaves, the activity of this brain region returns to normal.13 In other words, depression is related to a lack of general Teacher understanding.

While writing this section, I discovered an article on the Internet which suggested that the Teacher internal world also processes negative emotions. The brain metabolism of a number of human subjects was measured as they smelled a variety of odors. The only significant result noted was that the activity of the left orbitofrontal cortex increased when the subject encountered an odor considered to be “extremely aversive.” 14

I suggest the following interpretation: Positive Teacher emotion comes from discovering order within complexity. Teacher pain results when this order is threatened. An odor which is very unpleasant would be interpreted by the mind as potentially life-threatening. The Teacher internal world would notice the possibility of impending personal chaos, and react with concern. Hence, the activation of the left orbitofrontal cortex.

Let me conclude with one more striking case. “A suicide attempt with a gun resulted in left frontal lobe damage in a 19-year-old obsessive man. While intelligence did not suffer and no frontal lobe syndrome emerged, the patient’s obsessive rituals were significantly reduced.” 15 A ritual, I suggest, is a set of Server actions which have formed themselves into a general Teacher theory. Like our earlier description of a ‘universal theory’ based upon the action of attaching three screws and two bolts to a piece of L-shaped metal, the repetitive actions of a compulsive ritual acquire strong Teacher emotions, which in turn make them mentally attractive.[EE] Destroy the brain foundation for general theories, and the ritual suffers as well.

In conclusion, let me summarize what neurology knows about Teacher thought, and what I am proposing. First, it is known that speech depends upon two centers in the lower left hemisphere—Broca’s area in the left inferior frontal cortex, and Wernicke’s area in the left temporal lobe. Second, it is also known that the left and right amygdalae perform emotional processing. Finally, researchers know that the internal world of emotional appropriateness is located within the orbitofrontal cortex.

I am proposing that these three facts are related. I suggest that Teacher thought operates verbally, thinks by using the emotions generated by the left amygdala, and builds an internal world located within the left orbitofrontal cortex.

Split People in a Split World

We have looked at Teacher pseudo-theories and Mercy pseudo-cultures and the mechanics of how they function. Let us now examine the type of society which breeds these mongrel creatures. I suggest that the parents are just as mixed-up as their offspring.

Modern Man—the Idiot Savant

Modern man is a bizarre combination of intelligence and stupidity—hence the term ‘idiot savant.’ I suggest that this discrepancy is the result of mismatched personal growth. On the one hand, the me of our physical bodies has made tremendous strides forwards. On the other hand, the me of Mercy identification remains bound to its past—tied to its mother’s apron strings.

As far as our physical bodies are concerned, Western civilization is full of both Mercy care and Teacher order. We go to great lengths to protect the integrity of the me associated with our physical bodies; we try to cure every disease, prevent all accidents, and we severely punish any assault on either our persons or our property. We meticulously research medical principles of cause and effect—we test new cures extensively on animals for fear of damaging the physical body of some unfortunate human. Likewise, we have the most amazing economic systems ever created by mankind—they are wonders of Teacher order within complexity.

In contrast, our emotional identities seem to be characterized by Mercy sedition and Teacher chaos. We rebel from attempts to add integrity to the me of Mercy identification, and we demand freedom to identify emotionally with any experience or person. We avoid guilt, we ignore mistakes, and we punish those who state the facts. We deny mental principles of cause and effect, and we readily submit ourselves as guinea pigs for the latest emotional experiments. Likewise, we live with conflicting Teacher ideologies—a cacophony of complexity without order. We don’t know who we are and we have problems satisfying even the most basic needs of self-image. The theories which we do have about personality, identity, and social interaction usually place marketing above research and understanding.

The result is that our world is driven by two diametrically opposed forces. First, there is a dynamic connected with the me of our physical bodies. Here, we look for better Mercy experiences and greater Teacher order. We cure diseases, improve working conditions, increase leisure time, and raise our standard of living. Likewise, we work to create common markets, technical standards, world-wide-webs and combined peace operations—all to bring order to the complexity of our physical world.

In contrast, the energy associated with the me of Mercy identification struggles to create Mercy divisions and to destroy Teacher order. We are convulsed with ethnic tension. Special interest groups pit one Mercy identification against another. Houses sprout security systems and private lives build walls in order to protect me from the personal attacks of others. On the Teacher front, states declare their independence from countries and regions struggle for political autonomy. Individuals break laws and teenagers rebel against authority.

How do we combat the anarchy provoked by the me of Mercy identification? By adding more structure to the me of the physical body. Western democracy gives us permission to satisfy any emotional fantasy which we desire, as long as we do not damage the me of our physical bodies. We watch scenes of people pretending to mutilate each other, but we must never actually follow through on these fantasies. We bombard each other with advertising designed to attract attention through any means, but we must not extend this to the use of physical force. We lust after the possessions of another, but we are barred from actually taking his goods or entering his physical property. We pretend to have sex with anyone and everyone, but we are prohibited by law from turning imagination into reality.

‘Modern’ man is driven by two opposing forces:

· The me of the physical body builds order and pursues pleasure.

· The me of Mercy identification seeks division and destruction.

We control the me of identification by restricting the me of the body.

Similarly, when there is ethnic conflict in the world, we respond by sending peacekeeping troops—who solve emotional problems by imposing physical constraints. When there is dictatorship, we call for elections, to bring about emotional healing through external means. Our peace treaties restore territory and possessions but ignore the murderous attitudes of those who inhabit these lands.

I suggest that we also use the physical world to limit our Teacher chaos. Conflicting Teacher theories are kept apart by separating them physically. We divide our physical world, politically, into countries. Each nation is free to form its own Teacher order of laws and organizations—within its own territorial jurisdiction. We also use physical buildings and grounds to separate one religion from another. Each is free to worship and to serve its own version of universal understanding, as long as this activity is restricted to a particular church, temple or synagogue. The same thing happens with organizations, professions, and businesses. Each is permitted to construct and follow its own system of Teacher order—if it sticks to its own ‘turf,’ and if it respects the physical integrity of other individuals.[FF]

Pseudo-Maturity

I suggest that this combination of objective brilliance and subjective childishness is precisely what breeds pseudo-cultures and pseudo-theories. First, when personal development is limited to the me of the physical body, as in our present society, then pseudo-culture will be created; let us follow the process: Science studies the objective; it analyzes our physical bodies and our external world. It distances itself from personal feelings and follows logical reasoning. History shows that this approach leads to the development of a general Teacher understanding about the natural world—a positive result. Science, in turn, breeds technology, as Teacher theories are used to create new Mercy objects and experiences.

And technology, by its very nature, is a pseudo-culture. On the one hand, the Mercy objects produced by technology produce strong Teacher emotions because they embody the general principles of scientific order within complexity. On the other hand, these same objects trigger a minimum of Mercyfeelings, because they spring from a foundation which ignores the subjective and personal feeling. The result, as we said, is a pseudo-culture—it builds upon Mercy experiences that produce Teacher emotions.

For instance, how many of us have purchased the latest car or the fastest computer because it was there. We did not need it—it satisfied no Mercy desires. But, we were entranced by its power and its features. These are Teacher feelings. When people acquire the latest gadgets, just for the purpose of having them, that is an example of a pseudo-culture.[GG]

Second, when the me of Mercy identification lags behind the me of the physical body, as in our current culture, I suggest that the result will also be pseudo-theories; let us follow that process: We saw before that the childish me instinctively pursues short-term emotional benefits at the cost of long-term pain. By identifying with good experiences which cannot be repeated, me sets itself up for emotional letdown and disappointment; by refusing to identify emotionally with painful consequences, me suppresses the facts and finds itself repeating past mistakes. The overall result is a low self-esteem.

There are two basic ways of responding to this emotional pain. Either the me of Mercy identification can grow up, accept responsibility for its garbage, and clean up its mess, or it can continue to ignore the problems and look to the Teacher part for some kind of emotional comfort that can hide the hurt. If Teacher thought comes up with a pretense of a general theory which explains Mercy problems, then the positive Teacher feeling of understanding will help to disguise the Mercy feelings of emotional pain.

And this is what happens. Since people live in a scientific world which ignores Mercy feelings and which pursues Teacher understanding, then it makes sense that they apply this identical strategy to their own personal problems by generating pseudo-theories. Each Mercy hurt is bandaged with comforting Teacher words. And, the emotional relief which Mercy strategy feels when guilt and hurt are rationalized away, combined with the emotional respect which Mercy thought has for those who teach pseudo-theories, makes these words appear to Teacher thought as general concepts with great Teacher order.

Our ‘modern’ world breeds pseudo-cultures and pseudo-theories.

1) Technology creates pseudo-cultures.

· Technology comes from science, which ignores Mercy feelings.

· The gadgets form a Mercy culture devoid of Mercy emotions.

2) Psychology, social sciences, and religions create pseudo-theories.

· They analyze Mercy hurts in ways which protect Mercy feelings.

· The resulting Teacher theories lack consistency and generality.

For example, suppose that someone has a low ‘self-esteem.’ How do we treat his problem? Not by stating the facts honestly. That would be politically incorrect. Instead, we say nice things to him, and we teach him to make positive statements about himself. If the problem remains, then we analyze it objectively and turn it into a syndrome with a long scientific name. Thus we use technobabble to build pseudo-theories out of our mutual back-patting. Our Mercy hurts are still there, but the pseudo-idea now makes us feel better about the situation. Our pseudo-concept isn’t that great, but the academic weight of scientific talent that has analyzed our Mercy hurt makes the explanation appear truly significant.

Objective pseudo-cultures and subjective pseudo-theories tend to reinforce one another. On the one hand, the pseudo-culture of technology improves our living conditions without touching the me of Mercy identification—it avoids this me by remaining objective. Therefore, we think that the same approach can be used in the subjective, and we try to use the Teacher theorizing that underlies technology to improve our internal feelings. But we do not alter the me of Mercy identification. This leads to pseudo-theories—we give scientific sounding explanations to our emotional hang ups without going through the personal honesty that is needed to put these theories upon a proper foundation.

On the other hand, pseudo-theories make us feel better by giving us Teacher explanations which explain the me of Mercy identification without threatening it. Therefore, we think that the same approach can be used in the objective, and we use the Teacher based objects of technology to improve our personal Mercy feelings. This leads to commercialism, as we replace the deep Mercy feelings of culture with the trappings of gadgetry. We gain the veneer of culture without the personal development that alone can make us truly cultured.

Modern means of communication lead, in turn, to collisions between overlapping and competing pseudo-cultures and pseudo-theories. On the one hand, the development of mass media allows pseudo-cultures to extend their reach through advertising: “You need our merchandise. You will love our product. We can fulfill your fantasy. Visit our dream world.” The product may be inferior, but when it is backed by a slick advertising campaign, it has a good chance of becoming successful; the Teacher feelings of professionalism provided by the media tend to balance Mercy deficiencies in the product itself. Real objects which meet genuine needs can of course improve our quality of life. But pseudo-objects created to fulfill pseudo-needs come with no guarantee that Mercy thought will be pleased with the results.

On the other hand, the advent of worldwide communication allows pseudo-theories to extend beyond their natural physical borders. For instance, the civil servants of a specific government agency may be located within a certain building, but with electronic fingers they can reach far beyond the limits of their physical ‘turf.’ This leads to an overlapping of jurisdictions. For example, the citizen of today can only conform to law and order by simultaneously obeying the rules of his company, the laws of the land, the local bylaws, the regulations of various environmental protection agencies, the dictates of his family, and the expectations of his religion. These rules are not necessarily all consistent.

Replacing the Genuine with the Imitation

I suggest that competition between various pseudo-cultures and between competing pseudo-theories has the unfortunate byproduct of driving out the genuine and replacing it with the imitation. First, we have an environment in which each pseudo-culture uses professional advertising to sell its product. How do these items compete? In a real culture, people would have meaningful Mercy needs and desires. Individuals would know what they want and advertising could address these genuine requirements. In contrast, a pseudo-culture lacks Mercy feelings; therefore it must create Mercy desires. How will it do this? By adding more Teacher professionalism: The product has extra features, is ‘new and improved,’ scientifically developed and tested, and professionally presented and advertised. In other words, culture grows by becoming more ‘pseudo.’

Meanwhile, Mercy thought has to cope with a continuing barrage of conflicting emotional messages. If we listen to music, and it is too loud, then we turn down the volume. Similarly, when feelings are too strong, then Mercy mode reacts by reducing its emotional sensitivity. This causes the mind to ignore true culture as Mercy strategy loses its ability to appreciate the subtle pleasures of the real thing. Thus, the quiet voice of the genuine is drowned out amid the clamoring of the imitation.

Pseudo-culture drives out culture:

· Professional technology distracts people from Mercy feelings.

· Mercy mode closes up to protect itself, and people stop interacting.

Second, a similar process occurs with pseudo-theories. For instance, suppose that I live in a massive house, drive an expensive car, and talk constantly on my cellular phone. My actions may not have any greater Teacher order than those of my neighbor, but the Mercy emotions associated with these objects will give my conduct the appearance of Teacher order. I will look like a ‘mover and shaker’—someone whose actions have a wide effect and whose personal influence has a vast domain.

This is how pseudo-theories compete. They do not interact intellectually, for they lack true Teacher order. Instead, each pseudo-theory tries to increase its emotional appeal by associating itself with impressive Mercy objects, persons, and experiences. For instance, the seminar speaker may sell his theory with a thirty minute television commercial full of convincing speech and testimonials from famous people. Similarly, a company may attempt to increase its stature by erecting a huge corporate headquarters. This Mercy ambiance creates the impression of a global corporation with international connections, worldwide holdings, and diversified products. In the same way, a religious group can ‘extend’ the domain of its doctrines by improving the appearance and the size of its church building.

But what if everyone on the block has a large house and a new car? What if all the religious groups have their own magnificent buildings? What if every successful seminar speaker has his own infomercial? Then the only answer is to tear down the old and to build something even bigger and more impressive. Eventually, the point is reached at which the whole neighborhood is composed of huge homes, each filling most of the building lot with three stories of living grandeur. Likewise, every denomination and each belief has its own impressive sanctuary, used at most for only a few hours each week.[HH] In both material and non-material ways, each pseudo-theory bulges with Mercy connotations.

Meanwhile, true Teacher understanding is lost. On the one hand, the intellectual clamor of petty monarchs defending personal ‘turf’ drowns out the steady and peaceful signal of universal understanding. On the other hand, each pseudo-theory hoards the few Teacher facts which it possesses, restricting the intellectual interaction upon which true Teacher understanding is based.[II]

Pseudo-theories drive out real theories:

· Mercy symbols distract people from pursuing intellectual thought.

· Dialogue and learning stops as people hoard their concepts.

Now, imagine living as a Mercy or a Teacher person within this type of world. Mercy thought wants something to love; it longs to hold on to a set of stable, emotional memories within the internal Mercy world. Similarly, Teacher thinking desires a general understanding; it wants to focus upon a universal theory within the Teacher inner world. Unfortunately, whenever the Mercy or Teacher person today attempts to hold on to some emotional memory, others try to grab it out of his hands. It used to be possible to avoid this emotional barrage by restricting one’s physical movements. The Mercy person could love his home and family, for instance, and the Teacher individual could retreat to the order of personal study. But, now even this inner sanctum is not safe. Through media such as television, advertising enters our living rooms in vivid color. Similarly, government agencies move in to regulate one area of personal life after another.

These various institutions besiege us relentlessly with unrelated emotional situations, each trying to worm its way into the inner sanctum of Mercy identification. How is the Mercy person to defend himself when he is up against people and organizations scheming full-time to exploit new ways of bribing, cajoling, attacking or fooling the ‘doorman’ of Mercy identification into allowing them to reprogram his personal identity?

Similarly, we are caught in a crossfire of competing Teacher theories, slogans, ideas, and systems. Each organization, denomination, bureaucracy, country, and company has its own way of assigning order to complexity. Everywhere we go, we meet individuals with their own buzzwords, sales campaigns, positive thinking statements, personal philosophies, or pet doctrines which they are attempting to foist upon the rest of mankind. Even within the world of science, in which we supposedly follow the same general theory of natural law, people constantly split into opposing schools of thought with differing ideas and emphases.

Who survives this emotional brutality? The composite styles of Exhorter, Contributor and Facilitator. This is because they are conscious within the pump of the mind. If thought is a car, then they are the drivers. They adapt to the contradictions of life in one of two ways. First, they use their ‘driving skills’ to maneuver through and around the emotional potholes of living. When a driver has enough skill, then the shape of the car and the condition of the road are not important.

Second, they become mental chameleons, or shape shifters. As they move from one mental context to another, they allow their mental ‘cars’ to alter appearance. Then, sitting in a completely different automobile, they continue to drive. As long as their present ‘vehicle’ has a place for the driver, they can keep moving. And, because ‘out of sight is out of mind,’ they are not concerned with these contradictions in mental processing.[JJ] These individuals appear complicated, because their personality depends upon the context. One seldom knows who they really are inside—for neither do they. But, they have charisma, confidence, energy, and ‘the right stuff.’ Emotionally, they may be lost, but to them it does not matter, for they are making great progress.

In contrast, the Mercy and Teacher persons are the car. They are emotionally driven to hold on to something stable. When their mental automobile changes shape, then they experience gut-wrenching feelings.[KK] Unfortunately, our ‘modern’ environment of opposing desires and conflicting theories has become the approved standard. We are expected to change our personal shape to match the mood of the moment. The one who disengages his personal Mercy feelings and who single-mindedly pursues ‘success’ receives money and status, whereas the individual who holds on to a core of Mercy feelings is stepped upon, ridiculed, written off as a ‘hopeless romantic,’ and bypassed by the shape-shifters.

Similarly, the person who makes it in the arena of ideas is the one who can slide his way through the chaos of words—he catches a slogan here, he holds on to a special saying there, and he constantly picks the theory which seems best suited for the moment. Those who can step back from Teacher feelings and live as intellectual chameleons end up despising others, such as the Teacher person, who try to bring order to their world with some general Teacher theory. A Teacher thinker is labeled as ‘idealistic,’ ‘inflexible,’ ‘stubborn,’ ‘proud,’ or even ‘rebellious,’ when he refuses to sacrifice his worldview to the cause of the moment.

The end product is a society in which the rotting flesh of a childish me is covered over by the perfume of technology. Or, to quote the description of Tallyrand, a Facilitator diplomat who navigated through the turmoil of revolutionary France with head intact, the result is ‘shit in silk stockings.’ [LL]

Similarly, as Teacher theories lose intellectual integrity, they gain Mercy vibrations. This leads to New Age thinking, in which concepts are evaluated purely on the basis of their Mercy ‘clothing.’ ‘Magicians’ spout nonsense and are accepted as experts. ‘Nothing philosophies’ such as Buddhism are packaged with flowers of a good self-image and marketed as the latest fad.

Teacher ‘Multiples’ and ‘Schizos’

As humans, we find it difficult to live with Mercy chaos. This is because our physical environment forces us to acknowledge Mercy problems. First, we are vulnerable to physical pain. Our bodies can be hurt, damaged and even destroyed. This is felt directly by Mercy strategy. Second, we are affected by physical change. We live in a world of real objects, and when they are altered, Mercy thought is affected. We feel a sense of loss, for instance, when we visit our childhood neighborhood and find that everything has been rebuilt. Third we are subject to physical constraint. Our bodies are finite, and only capable of being in one place at a time. When roads crumble or become unsafe for the body to travel, or when walls or other barriers are erected that restrict the movement of the body, then Mercy strategy becomes trapped within a limited set of memories. Imagine being locked behind bars, for example, or caught in a snowstorm and forced for days to stay within a small cabin. Eventually, Mercy strategy which is based in the body goes ‘stir-crazy.’

In contrast, most humans are reasonably capable of living in an environment of Teacher semi-chaos. First, our physical bodies buffer us from personal Teacher disorder. On the whole, they operate flawlessly for decades on end. The inner world may fall apart, but the body continues to function. Second, our natural world shields us from societal Teacher chaos. Governments may fall and civilizations collapse, but day and night still follow one another as reliably as ever. Our justice system may not know up from down, but the law of gravity still holds. Finally, natural balance mechanisms within our global ecosystem heal situations of Teacher disorder. When chaos is inflicted by war, limited resources, or natural disaster, then natural processes repair the wounds.

As a result, I suggest that multiple personalities and schizophrenia—mental conditions which are regarded as diseases when they afflict Mercy thought—are generally accepted as a normal way of life as they affect Teacher strategy. Our physical bodies and our natural world do not force us to deal with Teacher inadequacies, and so we don’t. Instead, we expect to submit to incompatible systems of order as we move from one environment to another. We adjust to the local way of doing things; within each fiefdom of Teacher order, we bend our knee to the local ‘monarch.’

But isn’t it a little strong to state that society suffers from Teacher ‘multiple personalities’? A lack of understanding, perhaps, but split identity? Haven’t we just described the amazing Teacher order which exists within our world?

As far as Mercy cases of multiple personalities are concerned, it is not the minor hurts of everyday existence which matter, but rather a few highly intrusive invasions of personal privacy. The Mercy person may grow up in a loving home most of the time, but one or two isolated incidents of sexual assault are sufficient to create a multiple. Similarly, we may live in a society full of Teacher order, but if the core of our identity experiences chaos in some area, then it is sufficient to split us into Teacher ‘multiple personalities.’ Just like the Mercy individual with multiples, we may look normal on the surface, but inside we suffer from hidden Teacher trauma of irresolvable complexity.[MM]

Human speech provides an illustration of Teacher ‘multiple personalities.’ We think it natural that the average German, for instance, cannot communicate with a Hungarian, or that an English speaker cannot comprehend a word of Chinese. But think what this means mentally. Because we cannot understand each others’ words, each language group tends to develop its own Teacher understanding, bliss fully unaware of the concepts held by those who speak in other tongues. In the same way that the behavior of an individual with multiple personalities can shift completely as he moves from one context to another, so Teacher theories vary dramatically as one travels from one language group to another. In contrast, a universal Teacher theory, free of Teacher multiples, would be like a linguist who knew all tongues, and could understand what everyone was saying, in every environment.[NN]

Multiple personalities are generated in the Mercy part when a mental split occurs before the other mental ‘rooms’ have a chance to bring integration to the ‘house’ of the mind. In contrast, schizophrenia is associated with an emotional split which occurs later on, after the mental ‘house’ is partially connected. In the Teacher parallel to this, it is normal society that tends to suffer from Teacher ‘multiple personalities,’ for it is relatively uneducated. In contrast, I suggest that the professional and technical world, with its higher education, is more prone to cases of Teacher ‘schizophrenia.’ Just as the Mercy schizophrenic reacts to Mercy hurt by withdrawing to a safe corner of emotional comfort, so the professional individual tends to protect his world of Teacher theory by restricting his thought to some safe corner of Teacher order: Outside, there is chaos, but he is fine because he is a ‘medical doctor,’ an ‘electrical engineer,’ a ‘ballet dancer,’ or a ‘biologist.’ Within his small domain, the professional feels safe with his limited Teacher theories, precisely like the ‘know it all’ Teacher person as a child.[OO] When he deals with other areas of thought, the professional often tries to project his own small ideas onto the world at large, just as the Mercy schizophrenic attempts to impose his strange way of perceiving reality upon the outside world. Bring an engineer and a psychologist together, for instance, and they will probably find it rather difficult to carry on a professional conversation.

We treat Mercy schizophrenia and multiple personalities as diseases.

· Our physical bodies and world force us to deal with Mercy hurts.

· A world of changing experiences makes us value Mercy stability.

We accept Teacher ‘schizophrenia’ and ‘multiples’ as normal behavior.

· Our bodies do not force us to develop Teacher emotions.

· Natural law and order allow us to ignore internal Teacher chaos.

Of course, Teacher theories which are rooted in natural law can be applied to other situations, just as Mercy thinking which is based in common sense can be expanded to the outside world. However, the professional is often so specialized, so politically driven, and so institutionally ingrown that much of his thinking, outside of his own specific area, can only be described as schizophrenic. In terms of our animal analogy, he uses his ‘flea’ of a theory to explain the ‘elephant’ of the world, and the skin of his ‘flea’ can stretch only so far before everything explodes into a mass of hot air.

So how does the average Teacher person react to this kind of intellectual environment? If he lacks education and follows the path of ‘multiple personalities,’ he may never discover that his world is ruled by some kind of Teacher order. Instead, like the European who learns to speak multiple languages, his mind is so thoroughly pummeled by conflicting slogans and abstract chaos that he becomes permanently divided in his thought. He survives by swallowing theories whole from people with Mercy status. When he does think, he generates pseudo-theories based in Mercy feelings. His responses are driven by subconscious strategies—it may seem as if ‘no one is home.’ When Mercy emotions are healthy, then he is the ‘obedient and studious child.’ However, if they are damaged, then he becomes the rebel against whom nothing works—for he is now doubly split emotionally.

The Teacher individual who has learned to do some thinking may in turn become the ‘schizophrenic.’ Teacher feeling initially operates, as he attempts to work out intellectual order, just as the Mercy schizophrenic begins life by permitting himself to feel personal emotions. However, a point is finally reached at which the pain of living is so intense that a decision is made to pull back from further emotional involvement. The Mercy schizophrenic withdraws from the world of experiences and retreats into his little ‘home’ of pleasant memories and fantasy. Similarly, the Teacher ‘schizophrenic’ stops evaluating new theory, retreats into his little castle of current understanding, and pulls up the drawbridge. He may become the ‘physicist,’ the ‘mathematician,’ the ‘religious scholar’—a single profession defines his entire existence. Like the Mercy who has withdrawn from life, he occasionally allows Teacher strategy to operate, but most of the time he uses conscious control to freeze Teacher thought, so that he does not have to endure more intellectual pain. What others suffer from involuntarily, therefore, he enters into freely and willingly.

Teacher ‘multiple personalities,’ and to a lesser extent Teacher ‘schizophrenia,’ may be interpreted by others as loyalty. The split Teacher person can only survive emotionally by placing himself under the authority of others—the ones whose Mercy influence gives weight to their words. While they deal with external chaos, he remains safe within his castle. However, his loyalty must not be rewarded by promotion. If he is ever put in charge, then he must interact with the external world, and this means opening up his Teacher theories to the attacks of conflicting ideas—the very thing which he is choosing to avoid.

Putting the Wrong Foot Forward

Let us turn our attention back now to the struggle between the two me’s. We have looked at Teacher pseudo-theories and Mercy pseudo-cultures. We have seen how these grow naturally within an environment in which the me of the physical body is more developed than the me of Mercy identification. If mental growth could be compared to walking, then I suggest that this imbalance could be described as ‘putting the wrong foot forward.’ I suggest that this internal disequilibrium has other unpleasant implications.

First, there are problems with self-image. Imagine having to live with someone who does everything better than you do. Chances are that your feelings about yourself would plummet. This is exactly what happens when the me of our physical bodies is allowed to run ahead of the me of Mercy identification: Our physical world becomes increasingly ordered and our bodies look great, but inside, where we really feel, there is chaos and insecurity. Therefore, the me of Mercy identification—the partner with the deep emotions—ends up feeling inadequate.[PP]

Second, technology is used irresponsibly. Obviously, people who permit their ‘bodies’ to develop beyond their ‘hearts’ will create technology which they are emotionally unable to handle. It is like giving a small child the key to a car and allowing him to drive wherever he wishes. Inevitably he will end up in the ditch.

Third, I suggest that when Perceiver logic builds upon the me of my physical body while allowing the me of Mercy identification to remain mired in emotional 'facts' of childhood, then racism, sexism, and class divisions are inevitable side effects. Since this is an extreme statement, we will back it up carefully with logic, reminding ourselves first of some foundational facts: Perceiver confidence gives stability to Mercy thought by connecting individual Mercy experiences in a solid way. In contrast, Mercy memories which are held together by Perceiver 'facts' become relinked whenever a new defining experience comes along to establish a new set of so-called 'connections.'

If it is only the me associated with our physical bodies that gains Perceiver stability, then obviously the only solid facts which we will know about people will involve their physical bodies and their external environment. Perceiver thought will then organize people into categories based upon physical appearance and possessions. Therefore, if individuals look different, then Perceiver logic will decide that they are different. If they look the same, then Perceiver thought will conclude that they also are the same. Similarly, if people own the same types of externalobjects, then Perceiver thought will think that they belong together. Likewise, if individuals are surrounded by different kinds of external objects, then Perceiver strategy will decide that they do not belong together. This leads naturally to divisions based upon race, gender, and wealth.

One would predict that a society like ours, which places such a major emphasis upon science, technology, private enterprise and democracy—all areas related to the external world, to physical bodies, and to objective knowledge,[QQ] would have major problems with racism, sexism and class consciousness.

This means that those who protest against harassment and who preach the ‘gospel’ of political correctness have a valid complaint. However, if the underlying problem is a lack of rational logic in the subjective, then a ‘solution’ which suppresses dialogue, avoids emotional issues and focuses upon peripheral behavior will only make the problem worse and not better. You don’t cure a person by giving him more of the illness.

The me of the physical body created the problem; the me of Mercy identification makes it worse. Remember that an emotional 'fact' is learned when the strong feelings of a certain situation fool the Perceiver observer into 'believing' that experiences which occurred together within a single incident alwaysbelong together. Therefore, if I see a picture of some black teenager beating up an old lady in the inner city, the feelings associated with this event will hypnotize Perceiver thought into 'believing' that blacks, violence and poverty always go hand in hand.

Mercy strategy is most affected by visual images and physical pain and pleasure. Therefore, the emotional 'facts' about people which tend to stick in our minds will involve externals such as skin color, body contact and living conditions. The result is that it will be the very Perceiver categories associated with the me of our physical bodies that will be selectively supported by emotional 'facts' from defining experiences: Our ‘objective’ mindset will logically convince us, first of all, that blacks are different from whites, and this categorization will then be strongly reinforced emotionally by any image which we see of poor blacks attacking rich whites. Experiences of whites hurting blacks, in contrast, are rationalized away as aberrations by the Perceiver confidence associated with the me of our physical bodies. They may not even be noticed.

As one conclusion, I suggest that the terrible genocide perpetrated by the German Nazis against the Jews and other so-called ‘inferior races’ during World War II was not some inexplicable barbarian act, but rather a logical result of technical brilliance combined with social backwardness. Why did this racial hatred break out in Germany after World War I and not in other places? I suggest that there were three major reasons: First, Germany at that time was, quite possibly, the most technologically advanced country in the world. Second, this objective wisdom was combined with political immaturity. For hundreds of years, Germany had been splintered into separate little kingdoms, many of them under the tyranny of absolute monarchs. The country only became united in 1870, and this occurred because Bismarck used war with Austria and France as an emotional lever to ‘encourage’ the other German states to join Prussia, and not because of any Perceiver confidence in the rule of law. Even the German democracy which did appear after the First World War was triggered by the emotional upheaval of losing. Finally, the crisis of hyperinflation during the 1920s—within several years, for instance, the cost of mailing a letter went from one mark to over one billion marks—produced a set of emotional 'facts' based entirely in external distinctions of wealth and property. The result was that both Perceiver logic and emotional 'facts' agreed that the only categories which mattered were those of race, class and wealth.[RR]

It is risky to develop the physical me while ignoring the emotional me.

· People acquire powers which they do not know how to handle.

· Self-image erodes as objective skills outpace personal maturity.

· People treat each other as objects and ignore personal feelings.

When the me of our physical bodies moves ahead of the me of Mercy identification, then I suggest that race, gender or class distinctions can only be overcome in one of two ways: One option is to use emotional 'facts' to overturn Perceiver categories based in the me of our physical bodies. This happens when individuals have defining experiences with people of different backgrounds that go beyond external appearance and meet the emotional person within the physical shell. Thus, if the black man becomes ‘great buddies’ with his white neighbor, the feelings associated with this friendship might be sufficient to bring Perceiver conclusions about race distinctions within the threshold of uncertainty: “I thought that all whites were bad, but my neighbor is actually a nice guy. Is it possible that my ideas about blacks and whites could be wrong?” Similarly, if a black person and a white person attend the same church and have similar religious experiences, the emotions associated with their common religion could cause Perceiver facts about skin color or body shape to come into question.[SS]

The second option is to gain Perceiver confidence in facts which extend beyond the physical appearance of people. This happens, for example, when individuals gain skills which require the application of Perceiver knowledge to emotional situations. The female helicopter pilot, for instance, will be accepted as ‘one of the guys’ if she proves that she is competent on the job. When true skill is required, Perceiver thought learns that the really solid connections are those which are based upon ability and not upon external appearance. On the other hand, Perceiver facts associated with something more mundane such as an office job may never encounter sufficient emotional pressure to reprogram Perceiver ideas about race distinctions. Unless the black office worker goes through a real crisis with his white coworkers, he may be treated fairly at work, but never shake the underlying suspicion that we are ‘us’ and he is ‘one of them.’

Putting the Right Foot Forward

We have seen some of the problems which result from a pursuit of objective knowledge. Suppose that instead of allowing the me of the physical body to race far ahead of the me of Mercy identification, society followed the path of mental transformation, and focused Perceiver logic first of all on the me of Mercy identification. I suggest that, among other things, this would naturally create an environment free of race, gender and class conflicts. First, the sphere of thought would be different. Instead of concentrating on peoples’ bodies and possessions, we would look beyond physical appearance in order to discover their internal, emotional me. Second, the way of thinking would change. In place of suppressing facts which make us feel uncomfortable, we would grapple with issues of identity and use Perceiver logic to build bridges which could span our emotional differences. Eventually, external distinctions such as race, gender, or class would become non-issues, as Perceiver thought gained the confidence to move from one situation to another without feeling threatened.[TT]

Another result of putting the ‘right foot forward’ is that we would look at external poverty or handicap and see not failure, but rather opportunity. If the me of someone’s physical body is caught in some form of poverty, then he can always make personal progress by moving forward with the me of Mercy identification. His unchanging circumstances anchor the me of his physical body and give his emotional me the freedom to change dramatically. Moreover, if the poverty-stricken individual looks on from a distance at wealth which is denied to his physical body—something good which is not me—then he has an ideal opportunity to develop patience. It is precisely this type of situation which can ‘teleport’ him through mental transformation into the new me. Business lore is full of entrepreneurs who grew up in poverty, faced their world realistically and ended up becoming fabulously wealthy—by applying mental principles which they first learned during their humble beginnings.[UU]

Finally, we would find that people would be better than they look. Scratch the surface of a ‘successful’ individual in today’s world, and more often than not, you find a hollow interior, full of emotional pus and bad air. This is inevitable when the physical me moves ahead of the internal emotional me. In contrast, if mental growth happened first in the inner, hidden world of Mercy identification, then whenever you broke through the outer shell of an individual, you would be pleasantly surprised. The pulp and yellow journalism of today searches so vigorously for hidden garbage within the shell of success that the idea of the inner person being better than the external image seems ludicrous, naive, and unimaginable. But why not? Must our identity be forever shackled to the conditions of our external existence, or is it possible for Mercy imagination, guided by Perceiver logic, to envision and to build a better world? And if so, then why not turn theoretical possibility into reality? Do we want to do something about our failing society or will we merely applaud the band for playing courageously as the ship of Western civilization sinks slowly beneath the waves?

Transforming the me of Mercy identification brings positive benefits:

· Ethnic and cultural conflict is replaced by cultural diversity.

· Personal hardship becomes an opportunity for growth and success.

· Life acquires meaning and people turn into persons.

How did I get onto this topic, anyway? Let’s see. It started with a look at Teacher ‘multiple personalities’ and ‘schizophrenia.’ Then I opened my big mouth and stated that our whole Western world is suffering from these diseases in intellectual form. After that, I suggested that these mental illnesses were evidence that the me of our physical bodies had moved ahead of the me of Mercy identification. Then I put my other foot in my mouth, not yet extricating the first, and suggested that this mental combination led inevitably to racism, sexism, and class division. From there it was a short step to a full-blown monologue on Nazism and the holocaust. Finally, I got frustrated and asked why we had to go through all of this garbage. See, I warned you that I would head straight for a mudhole.

But wait, is it me who is dragging you through the mud, or am I just describing the muck in which we all wallow? Well, you decide. Meanwhile, let us see if we can continue our tour of the mind. And, for those of you who find Perceiver associations disorienting, if you survive one more section, we will finish this first volume by tying a number of these threads together.

Putting the Right Foot Backward

I have suggested that when the me of my physical body moves ahead of the me of Mercy identification, then Teacher ‘multiple personalities’ and ‘schizophrenia’ become an integral part of society. If symmetry holds—and I have found that when looking at the mind, symmetry always works—then the ‘opposite’ problem should have the ‘opposite’ cause. In other words, Mercy multiple personalities and schizophrenia should be a byproduct of a me of Mercy identification which is moving too far beyond the me of my physical body. This also appears to be the case. We will examine this specific symmetry and then show how it connects with our discussion so far—and see why I have titled this section, ‘putting the right foot backward.’

Multiple personalities are usually caused when a Mercy person, or possibly some other cognitive style, is violated sexually as a small child.[VV] This definitely is a case of feelings running past physical growth. The child has a small, undeveloped body. He has not yet had the years of experience which are required to teach common sense, nor the knowledge of what it means to live within an adult body. Therefore, the me related to his physical body is fragile and immature. Now, suppose that some adult comes along and uses his emotional significance (remember that to a little child, grown-ups are almost godlike) to force Mercy strategy in the child to identify with a physical invasion of personal privacy. The only way that the child can defend himself is through the me of Mercy identification: He blocks off the horrible experience and pretends that it is not me.

Perceiver confidence tells us that we have one and only one physical body and that this body can only be in one place at a time. This is the Perceiver glue which holds together the me of my physical body. But, as with any Perceiver information, I suggest that this fact takes time to grow. Strong emotional experiences which occur too early in life can prevent Perceiver confidence from learning this fact. The result is a self-image in which the person literally 'knows' that me consists of different people with different bodies living within the same mind—the emotion associated with blocking off the painful event has mesmerized the Perceiver observer into 'believing' this 'fact.' Therefore, if the abuse reoccurs, then the child with multiple personalities will literally 'know' that the experience is happening to another body, despite the evidence provided by his senses.

In a normal person, sexual encounters are postponed until the me of the physical body has enough structural resilience to handle the accompanying emotional identification without falling apart. Then, when the act of sex fills the me of Mercy identification with emotional experiences, the me of the physical body will stay in one piece. This principle could be illustrated, perhaps, by the person who gets drunk. Mentally speaking, he is no longer integrated: Me has become scattered. On the other hand, the body of the drunk still remains in one piece and acts as a ‘container’ for his mental ‘jelly’ until it has a chance to re-form again into the ‘solid’ of a rational thinking person.

Transforming the me of identification requires a proper foundation.

· Perceiver confidence must be sufficient to handle Mercy feelings.

· Without this mental structure, identity crumbles.

· The end is regression and pain, rather than growth and happiness.

Now let us turn to the topic of Mercy schizophrenia. Is this also a situation in which the me of the physical body lags behind the me of Mercy identification? In answer to this, I suggest that all cases of schizophrenia are characterized by two major symptoms: First, there is an abundance of wishful thinking and fantasizing. The schizophrenic may feel that he has special powers, he may be repulsed by specific colors or objects, fear certain individuals, dwell upon incidents in the past, or even retreat into his own internal world. In all cases, he is actively using Mercy identification either to avoid or in contrast to hold on to certain emotional experiences. In other words, the me of Mercy identification is overactive.

Second, schizophrenia is always accompanied by a dearth of rational logic and common sense. The imaginative ideas are not consistent and do not match external reality, yet no amount of logical reasoning will convince the schizophrenic person to abandon his 'beliefs.' This suggests that the me of the physical body is definitely underactive.

In a sense, our research on the mind has turned both my brother and me into schizophrenics. Using rational thinking, we have moved forward with the me of Mercy identification to the point where we have written several books on the topic. Meanwhile our physical situation continues unaltered. If sanity were defined by the opinions of the majority, then we would be classified as insane, for we have built our minds around an understanding which is shared by very few others. However, if rational thought is possible, then we are not crazy, for our theory continues to explain the behavior of others, and it is consistent with the facts which they have discovered, even though they do not share our understanding. Meanwhile, we have to live with the stress of interacting with people on one level while at the same time analyzing them on another. If the tension snapped, we would certainly turn into multiple personalities.

The Big Picture of Walking

Now that we have examined the details, let us step back and look at the big picture. As humans, we live in an asymmetrical world. On the one hand, the natural order of our bodies and the surroundings of a natural world give external stability to Teacher thought. In contrast, our minds are flooded—from this same body and identical world—with Mercy feelings which threaten the internal stability of Mercy strategy. There are several ways to respond.

First, we can ignore Mercy feelings and concentrate upon gaining more Teacher order. This is the approach of Western society, which I have called ‘putting the wrong foot forward.’ Why is it the wrong foot? Because Mercy feelings are abandoned like an unwanted child at the doorstep of culture and religion. This leads to pseudo-theories and pseudo-cultures as suppressed Mercy emotions warp Teacher thinking and limit Mercy enjoyment.

Second, we can focus upon building internal stability for Mercy thought. This is the path which is described in this book. I call it ‘putting the right foot forward.’ This is because Mercy feelings are digested and integrated—this makes true culture possible. Teacher understanding in turn is expanded to include all areas of thought—this replaces pseudo-thinking with general theories.

Third, we can ignore the internal world and focus upon external Mercy emotions. Feelings are pursued regardless of the effect which this has upon internal thought. In the extreme, this is the path of the child molester who uses physical ‘intimacy’ to destroy the fragile internal structure in the mind of his victim. The recipient of this abuse responds in like manner, using Mercy identification—based upon external defining experiences—to split his internal identity into various fragments. Or, when the mind can no longer be split, Mercy identification in him, through schizophrenia, holds on to aspects of thought which are pleasant, and suppresses internal structures which produce mental pain.

This strategy could be called ‘putting the right foot backward.’ On the one hand, the focus is upon subjective Mercy thought—the correct ‘foot.’ However, internal Mercy structure is not advanced, but rather torn down—the ‘foot’ is moving backwards and not forwards.

‘Putting the wrong foot forward’ leads to pseudo-cultures and pseudo-theories. These are positive results which are incomplete. The conditions created by ‘putting the right foot backward’ are similar, because the same ‘foot’ as before ends up in front, but more noxious, because the relative movement is backwards. Instead of pseudo-culture, one finds pseudo-identity: Mercy experiences with the strongest feelings no longer have contact with me, but are now blocked off and assigned to various multiples. Therefore, each aspect of me becomes hollow emotionally, for it is aware of only some Mercy feelings.

Pseudo-culture looks to Teacher professionalism for its appeal. Pseudo-identity, in contrast, depends upon Teacher order for its very existence. The person whose mind is fragmented can only survive because he lives in a natural world and a physical body which stay in one piece and continue to function, even when his thinking falls apart. The individual with multiple personalities may have gaps within his internal recollection, but the external world continues to tick along, and it provides a stable order which holds together his internal multiplicity.

Pseudo-theories in turn take the form of pseudo-life. Each fragment of intellectual Teacher identity is based upon the defining experience of some Mercy hurt or trauma. Some of these mental fragments are very single-minded, like two-dimensional caricatures of real persons. However, the vividness of the defining Mercy trauma which underlies them makes up for this lack of Teacher generality. In the same way that pseudo-identity depends upon existing Teacher order for its existence, so pseudo-life must have its Mercy defining experiences in order to continue.

Finally, we have the fourth option of ‘moving the wrong foot backward.’ This approach attacks mental stability by destroying the external Teacher order present within the physical body and the natural world. It is what happens during war. Each side bombs the land of the other, and kills its soldiers—this reduces the order of the natural world to rubble, and destroys the physical ‘order within complexity’ which we call life. I think we can safely describe death and destruction as a move backwards. Even those who survive in a physical sense often experience permanent mental scarring.

The Really Big Picture of Walking

We have compared mental growth to the process of putting one foot in front of the other. I have suggested that progress is achieved when we choose the correct foot and move it forward. As humans, with physical bodies living in a physical world, permanent growth occurs when we move ahead first with the me of Mercy identification. That is the major step.

Walking, however, involves a succession of steps. First I put one foot forward, then the other, then the one. In order to keep going and to remain in balance, I must move the proper foot at the right time. And, I must move it forward the right amount—not too little and not too much. Similarly, I suggest that human development also involves a succession of steps. First, we start out as raw infants—bundles of feelings which do nothing. Emotional experiences from the physical body build up the me of Mercy identification. Then the infant turns into a toddler, and the me of the physical body has a chance to catch up. Using the emotional identity which was acquired as a baby, the child begins to explore the natural order of his body and his world. About the time that the youngster gets the ‘hang’ of his physical surroundings, his hormones start flowing and he is faced with the emotional feelings of an adult. This trauma reprograms the me of Mercy identification, allowing him to digest the emotional memories of his childhood. Then he gets married and has a family and must program the me of the physical body with a whole new set of facts and skills. One ‘step’ leads to another.

Mental growth is like walking.

· The me of Mercy identification forms one ‘leg.’

· The me of the physical body forms the other ‘leg.’

· Only one ‘leg’ can be moved forward at a time.

Growth involves planting one ‘leg’ while moving the other.

· If the fixed ‘leg’ is not anchored solidly, identity will ‘slip.’

· If one ‘leg’ moves too far ahead of the other, identity will ‘topple.’

So why am I focusing so heavily upon mental transformation, which advances the me of Mercy identification? Because, as a civilization, I suggest that we are in the ‘teenage’ phase. The dark ages of Western Christendom initially programmed the me of Mercy identification with our Judeo-Christian heritage. Then we discovered the order of the natural world and spent several hundred years learning how to run and play in the backyard of technology. Now we have reached a stage at which the me of our physical bodies is quite highly developed, whereas the me of Mercy identification remains back in the dark ages of our infancy. Unless we move the other ‘foot’ forward, we are going to lose our balance and crash to the ground. However, must Western civilization collapse? Why not get that other ‘leg’ working and keep walking?

But why haven’t we moved forward already with the me of Mercy identification? If our physical bodies and our physical world determine that this is the correct ‘foot’ to move, then why didn’t we move it before? Because, we couldn’t. It is only as the teenager emerges from parental authority and encounters his own feelings that he is able to ask real questions and establish his own identity. Until then, his mind is mesmerized by the glare of emotional 'truth.' Similarly, it is only as we emerge from our ‘parental authority’ of a Judeo-Christian heritage and encounter major feedback from our civilizing efforts that we are able to ask real questions and work out our own identity.[WW] Until then, our minds are mesmerized by the glare of emotional 'truth.'

But, what type of teenagers are we turning out to be? Are we rebelling from our Judeo-Christian parentage, submitting to the peer pressure of tolerance, and setting up a counter-culture of New Age bitterness against ‘the establishment’ of science and technology, or are we following the path of mental growth, analyzing the 'beliefs' which we inherited from our parents and learning to think and act like mature, rational adults?

Glossary

Absolute A Perceiver fact, residing within the internal world of Perceiver thought, which determines the labeling of other facts. Because facts only enter into the internal world of Perceiver thought through the step of belief, an absolute is always a belief. Within each mental context, the fact with the greatest certainty will act as an absolute.

Abstract One of two basic types of mental information. Abstract data consists of ideas, theories, and facts. It looks for general principles. Teacher and Perceiver modes work with abstract data.

Analytical One of the two major ways of mental processing. Analytical thinking works with time, order, and sequences. Analytical processing occurs within the left hemisphere of the brain cortex. Teacher and Server strategy think analytically.

Approval conscience The form of conscience created by emotional 'truth.' Mental connections between cause and effect are determined by the opinions of important people, and punishment or approval is also doled out by these same individuals, or by their representatives.

Associative One of the two major ways of mental processing. Associative thought works with objects, and space. Associative processing occurs within the right hemisphere of the brain cortex. Perceiver and Mercy modes think associatively.

Automatic Thought The ‘storage shed’ of thought. Each of the four simple styles has its own region of automatic thought. Any input to the mind is automatically placed and sorted within automatic thought.

Back of the Cortex See posterior cortex.

Beauty The feeling that comes from associating positive Teacher feelings with a Mercy object. Beauty may also involve Mercy emotions, but these are secondary to the Teacher feelings.

Belief The step which places a Perceiver fact within the internal world of Perceiver thought. If a Perceiver fact is associated with excessive Mercy feelings, then Perceiver strategy will be mesmerized into 'believing' it. If a fact is repeated sufficient times within automatic Perceiver thought, then Perceiver thought will be strongly encouraged to believe it. This book treats truth and a belief as synonyms.

Catharsis A method of removing feelings of guilt by reliving a condemning situation in altered form. The mind is presented with an experience which is almost identical to the one which originally created the sense of guilt. The only difference is that the new situation assigns the blame for failure to someother cause or person. This method is related to the syndrome.

Commitment The step which places a Server sequence within the internal world of Server thought. Because the physical body is capable of imposing sequences upon the external world, action and commitment are usually related.

Common Sense The network of Perceiver facts and beliefs which develops through experiences with the physical body and the natural world. It is based in repetition and Perceiver confidence.

Composite Styles The composite styles are the Exhorter, Contributor, and Facilitator. These three combine other modes of thinking. They are responsible for the drive and motivation of thought. They are located within the basal ganglia and the thalamus of the brain.

Comprehension The step which places information within the internal world of Teacher thought. If a new Teacher theory has stronger emotions than existing Teacher memories, then comprehension will be involuntary. Involuntary comprehension is often responsible for the mental ‘aha’—in which the ‘light suddenly goes on’ internally.

Concrete One of two basic types of mental information. Concrete memories deal with experiences, actions, and events. They look at a situation itself, and not the theory behind it. Mercy and Server modes work with concrete information.

Confidence A mental and physical sensation related to stability. If there is a solid connection, then confidence will be positive. If it is known that no connection exists, then confidence will be negative. Perceiver, Server, and Contributor strategies think using confidence. Perceiver confidence is determined by the truth or error of facts. Server confidence is related to the ‘doability’ of actions or the existence of sequences. Contributor confidence is based upon the relationship between Perceiver facts and Server actions.

Conscience A Perceiver connection between two Mercy experiences separated by time which has the potential to affect identity in a negative way. If Mercy strategy identifies with the first experience (which feels good), then Perceiver thought predicts that Mercy thought will also have to identify with the second experience (which feels bad). Conscience and patience use the same mental mechanism.

Conscious The mental ‘room’ in which a person ‘lives,’ determined by cognitive style. For example, the Server person is conscious in Server strategy. Each cognitive style has a different area of consciousness.

Culture The set of Perceiver facts, Mercy experiences, Mercy feelings, and Server actions held in common by a group of people, and integrated around their Perceiver beliefs. Culture can either be the basis for mental thought, or an expression of internal thought.

Defining Experience A Mercy memory which has sufficient emotional strength both to affect Mercy feelings and to determine Perceiver 'truth.' First, it is an emotional absolute—the most emotional memory within its Mercy context. Second, it mesmerizes the Perceiver observer into 'believing' that this specific situation defines 'truth.'

Elegance The feeling that comes from associating positive Teacher emotions with the movement of some Mercy or Server based object or concept.

Emotion A mental and physical sensation related to interaction. If the interaction is harmful, then the emotion will be painful. If the interaction is beneficial, then the feelings will be positive. Emotion may be produced by either Teacher or Mercy thought depending upon the type of interaction. If there is an interplay between ideas, theories, words, curves, outlines, or sequences, then Teacher feelings will be generated. If the interaction involves people, experiences, events, meanings, or objects, then Mercy feelings will be produced.

Emotional Absolute The Mercy memory, within a certain context, with the strongest emotional label. It determines how Mercy thought feels about all related memories. Each mental context would have its own emotional absolute.

Excitement A mental or physical sensation produced by Exhorter thought, which is generated in turn by emotion. Excitement is related to novelty. When there is the possibility of something new, uncertain, or unpredictable, then there will be excitement. If there is no change, excitement turns into boredom. If change is blocked, then excitement is replaced by frustration. Excitement and mental energy are closely connected.

Fact A repeatable arrangement of Mercy experiences. If Perceiver strategy sees that certain Mercy items occur together often, it accepts these connections as a fact. Facts involve mainly automatic Perceiver thought. Beliefs and truth, in contrast, always live within the internal Perceiver world.

'Fact' The arrangement of a single Mercy situation, the emotions of which fool Perceiver thought into thinking that this arrangement will be repeated in other situations. A 'belief' or 'truth' is a strengthened form of 'fact.'

Faith Belief in action. Belief describes a fact which Perceiver thought knows to be accurate. Faith combines Perceiver knowing in facts with Server knowing in actions. This enables Contributor strategy—which combines Perceiver and Server thought—to operate. In other words, faith is related to Contributor confidence. It is possible for an awake Contributor to build upon a foundation of mesmerized Perceiver and/or Server thought. This leads to blind 'faith.'

Frontal Cortex The front half of the cortex, which in turn is the folded sheet of material which appears on the surface of the brain. This region contains the internal world of thought. Each of the four simple styles has access to a portion of frontal cortex. Memories can only enter into frontal cortex by passing one of the four ‘doormen’ which stand guard over the entrance. Humans have a much larger frontal cortex than do animals; this is one of the major brain differences between humans and animals.

Guilt The negative Mercy feeling which comes from triggering conscience. Perceiver thought knows that there is a connection between some good Mercy experience and a bad Mercy result. Because Mercy thought has identified with the good Mercy experience, Perceiver strategy predicts that Mercy strategy will also have to identify with the bad Mercy result.

Identification The mental step which places an experience within the internal world of Mercy thought. If an experience, in some particular context, has stronger emotions than related memories which already reside within the Mercy internal world, then identification is involuntary.

Imagination The inner flow of thought. Imagination can be verbal, associated with the left hemisphere, or visual, connected with the right hemisphere. The three composite styles are responsible for generating imagination. Exhorter thought, the first stage, comes up with ideas, pictures, words, and drive. Contributor mode, the second stage, combines these elements to produce an internal ‘movie’ of plans and situations. Facilitator strategy, the third stage, fills in the gaps of this internal ‘movie’ and makes it smooth and realistic.

Internal World Each of the four simple styles has its own internal world. This is a region of thought where memories enter by invitation only. The internal world allows a person to become unique, because he can choose how it is developed. The internal world is contained within the frontal cortex.

Knowing The solidness of a specific Perceiver (or Server) memory. If the Perceiver observer is awake, then knowing corresponds to confidence. If Perceiver thought is mesmerized, then the strength of 'knowing' (written with single quotes) is a measure of the depth of Perceiver hypnosis.

Me The set of Mercy memories upon which Mercy thought can continue to concentrate. Me is usually divided into two parts: the me of Mercy identification and the me of the physical body. The former is formed by the emotions produced by the body, while the latter is developed by the structure, knowledge, strength and skills of the body.

Meditation Focusing upon the positive Teacher feelings of a general theory that is rooted in Mercy identification. If Mercy thought identifies with some experience, person, or object, this will fool Perceiver strategy into 'believing' the 'fact' that these things belong together. If this 'belief' is accepted as an 'absolute,' then Perceiver mode will 'believe' the universal 'truth' that all specific items belong together. Teacher thought will then notice this system of 'belief' and view it as a description of order within complexity. The result will be positive Teacher emotion, rooted in Mercy-driven delusion.

Natural Conscience The form of conscience which develops from common sense. Perceiver thought discovers solid connections between cause and effect which are independent of the opinions of people or their emotional status. Natural conscience is held together by Perceiver confidence.

Object A collection of Mercy memories organized by Perceiver strategy. Perceiver thought observes Mercy mode and decides which Mercy experiences belong together and which do not. If Perceiver strategy decides that certain Mercy memories form a group, then these Mercy memories will become an object. Mental objects can come in all sizes, shapes, and forms. They can be modified into something quite abstract and different from the initial Mercy situations.

Objective A form of thought which protects Perceiver facts by avoiding Mercy feelings. When objective thought analyzes the natural world, it leads to common sense and Teacher understanding, but threatens Mercy thought. Science is an example of objective thinking.

Opportunity A possibility to better my personal condition by attaching something good to me. Opportunity assumes that Perceiver structure suffices to keep the goal stable while I am reaching for it, and that Perceiver rules exist to keep the object attached to me once I have acquired it. My view of opportunity will depend upon my definition of me.

Patience A Perceiver connection between two Mercy events that are separated by time, in which the second experience is better than the first. If Mercy strategy identifies with the first experience (which feels bad), then Perceiver thought predicts that Mercy thought will also be able to identify with the second experience (which feels good). Conscience and patience use the same mental mechanism. Episodes of patience can combine to create a path of patience, which is able to propel me through personal transformation.

Personal Transformation The process of changing a me based in emotional 'truth' to one rooted in logical facts. The Perceiver facts which hold me together are dragged through the threshold of confusion. This causes me to fall apart and then come back together again. The Mercy experiences which defineme survive but the connections between them change. Therefore, me is transformed but not destroyed.

Political Correctness The intolerance which results from pursuing tolerance. Political correctness believes that each person is the source of his own 'truth.' Groups or individuals with emotional Mercy memories thus become the source of absolute 'truth' for all other groups or individuals.

Posterior Cortex The back of the cortex, which in turn is the folded sheet of cells which one sees on the surface of the brain. Posterior cortex carries out automatic thought, which stores information from the four senses of sight, sound, taste, and touch. (The fifth sense of smell affects frontal cortex directly.) Each of the four simple styles has access to its own region of posterior cortex.

Pseudo-culture A set of Mercy memories which is given emotional depth through Teacher order. The positive Teacher feelings fool Mercy mode into feeling that the culture has deep meaning when it is actually quite shallow.

Pseudo-theory A Teacher theory which is given its ‘generality’ through Mercy emotion. The positive Mercy feeling fools Teacher strategy into thinking that the Teacher explanation is more general than it actually is.

Self-Confidence The level of confidence associated with the Perceiver facts which define the me of Mercy strategy. It measures how well I know myself. Self-confidence can also refer to the confidence which Contributor strategy has in forming and executing plans involving me. Because Contributor confidence is based upon a foundation of Perceiver and Server knowing, these two definitions are closely related. See Self-Image.

Self-Image The object which Perceiver thought forms about me. Me consists of Mercy memories and resides within Mercy thought. Self image is the set of facts which the Perceiver observer forms about me by observing from next door. It is possible for Mercy feelings to mesmerize the Perceiver observer into 'believing' certain 'facts' about me. This results in a warped self-image. See Self-Confidence.

Simple Styles The four cognitive styles of Mercy, Perceiver, Server and Teacher. They are called the simple styles because each uses a single form of mental processing on a single type of information. The simple styles deal with the content of thought. They are located within the cortex of the brain. The composite styles are located within the sub-cortex, and build upon this foundation of thought.

Subconscious The mental ‘rooms’ in which a person does not ‘live.’ This is determined by cognitive style. In the Mercy person, for instance, all modes of thought except Mercy processing are subconscious. A person may be partially aware of some of his subconscious. For instance, the Perceiver person can ‘see’ Mercy thought.

Subjective A form of thinking which accepts Mercy feelings, and avoids Perceiver logic by allowing Mercy emotions to mesmerize the Perceiver observer. Much of art, religion, entertainment, and the soft sciences fall into the category of subjective thought.

Suffering Emotional pain which the me of the physical body imposes upon the me of Mercy identification. In some way, either the world or my body forces me to live with emotional discomfort. Suffering can lead to personal transformation if the process of removing the pain teaches lessons of patience.

Syndrome A method of removing feelings of guilt by appealing to medical knowledge. If my ailments can be diagnosed by the medical profession as a set of symptoms which are common to many people, then I can blame my body or my environment for my failures. Note: This misuse of medicine originates in subjective thought. The syndrome is similar to catharsis.

Temptation The mental feeling that results from combining a ‘bait’ which is always present with a ‘hook’ that is sometimes present. Because punishment is only probable and not certain, the mind looks for ways of enjoying the pleasure while avoiding the punishment.

Threshold of Uncertainty The region of Perceiver uncertainty which separates logical facts from emotional 'truth.' Emotions (usually from Mercy thought) are not strong enough to mesmerize Perceiver thought into 'knowing' what is 'true,' and Perceiver confidence is not strong enough for logical thought to know what is true. In this state, the Perceiver observer is half awake.

Tolerance The belief that each person is the source of his own 'truth,' and that no one should be the source of someone else’s 'truth.' Tolerance destroys Perceiver thought because it forbids Perceiver strategy from looking for similarities between situations. This leaves emotional 'truth' in charge and ensures that some person will always be the source of 'truth'—thus bringing an end to tolerance.

Transformation See Personal Transformation.

[A] It is also interesting that my brother has discovered only two Teacher persons in history whose biographies have been written: Newton and Einstein. While the Teacher person may be excellent at coming up occasionally with new theories in the realms of science, it appears that his abilities thus far have been rather limited outside of this narrow area of expertise. However, if there really is a general Teacher theory which explains human thought, then it may be possible for the Teacher person to escape the intellectual ghetto of math and science and to discover that his seemingly ‘limited’ mental ability has expanded suddenly to cover all of human existence.

[B] Remember that anyone can experience the benefits of a well-ordered storage shed. Years of thinking together with my brother gave me the ability to come up with my own original ideas, as my subconscious Teacher mode began to operate. Thus, many of the secondary developments in this book didoriginate with me. Everyone can acquire some of the abilities that are possessed most strongly by the Teacher person.

[C] This tendency to restrict oneself to an area of intellectual expertise is especially characteristic of the intellectual Contributor person, who works with subconscious Teacher strategy. Teacher emotion, professional status, and sensitivity to winning and losing can combine to create walls of specialization that are almost airtight.

[D] We will see later that it is the Exhorter person who is mentally driven to combine emotional Mercy experiences with emotional Teacher theories. I mentioned that the theory in this book was initially conceived by my brother, a Teacher person. He in turn encountered the basic idea of seven cognitive styles in the Seminar notebook of an Exhorter speaker named Bill Gothard. Without some seed theory, a Teacher person would not have dared to examine personality differences with their emotional connotations. The Exhorter individual in his role as instant expert might postulate a theory of personality styles, but would then be repelled intellectually as the Teacher person put some flesh on this concept.

[E] I am using a humorous analogy in order to get a point across. The Exhorter person, who combines Teacher thought with Mercy thinking, is usually most guilty of using Mercy feelings to inflate the generality of a Teacher concept. However, the Teacher person may also commit a similar crime. By choosing to concentrate upon some particular explanation, he effectively turns it into an ‘elephant,’ regardless of its actual size. In the same way that the unsettled Mercy person clings to emotional experiences which are ‘safe,’ so the immature Teacher person can clutch on to his favorite theories.

[F] For the technical person: It becomes general by developing slots for variables. For instance, the specific statement, 50 °F = 10 °C, is turned into the general statement, °F = 9/5°C + 32. Both of these are Teacher sequences of ‘words’, but the general one has become ‘fuzzy’ in certain spots. ‘Fuzzy’ areas can temporarily take on the shape of specifics. In mathematical terms, these ‘fuzzy’ regions are variables.

[G] It is difficult to be around a Teacher person when he is thinking. This is because conscious thought for him involves turning ‘animals’ of all sizes temporarily into ‘elephants.’ When he is working with major concepts, the rapidity and totality with which he lifts up seemingly insignificant concepts can give him the appearance of mental instability or even insanity—pity the poor Teacher person who ever becomes famous and must interact with the media, who hold him to his every word. However, it is precisely this ability which makes him an original thinker.

[H] I am assuming that there is no ‘We honor all store coupons’ policy.

[I] You can see that Teacher thought would coexist easily with the common sense of Perceiver thought, for reasonableness in common sense is determined by repetition.

[J] This book is an example, so far at least, of ‘being nice.’ Coming sections cover these topics at a deeper level—they are therefore more compelling, and consequently much more ‘Teacher nasty.’

[K] There is therefore the potential for a me of Teacher thought. As you might imagine, it also can experience transformation. This process involves clarifying the distinction between universal Teacher understanding and the Teacher theory which describes my personal behavior.

[L] At this moment I do not know the second step as well as the first. Therefore my understanding is probably incomplete, and my description would be complicated and inadequate. Being a Perceiver person, I can see what is happening within Mercy thought. For Teacher thinking, I must ‘fly by instruments.’ Therefore, this book will describe Teacher thought, but emphasize how this thinking relates to the process of transforming the me that is in the Mercy part. That is what we need to know right now.

[M] This implies that Mercy mode is operating poorly in visual artists who draw by splashing gobs of paint indiscriminately onto canvas. This type of modern ‘art’ has become popular during our age of science and technology, in which Mercy feelings are suppressed in order to exalt objective thinking. The result is a world full of Mercy unsubtlety. This connection between subtlety and Mercy thought is illustrated also by the toys which we give to little children. Because Mercy thought in our youngsters is only partially developed, we construct playthings for them with simple shapes and gobs of bright colors.

[N] Words are some of the simplest Teacher theories. ‘Animal,’ for instance is more general than ‘elephant’ or ‘mouse.’ A Teacher person can develop theories composed of concepts which are too general for words. It can be a struggle for him to express his thoughts. This is another reason for a large vocabulary.

[O] This is a strong word, but the Teacher person does think emotionally.

[P] We suggested earlier that the voices heard by the schizophrenic Mercy person originate in subconscious Teacher mode. The Teacher person is conscious in the module that causes this behavior.

[Q] If this theory of the mind is correct, and if it truly explains the world of human interaction, then personal life itself turns from raw experience into a derived technology—the expression of a Teacher theory. It will be interesting to see the result.

[R] If Mercy experiences define Perceiver 'facts' hypnotically, then a society is based upon culture. If Perceiver belief gains independence from Mercy emotional pressure, then a society expresses itself through culture. In one case, culture is the ‘horse,’ in the other, it is the ‘cart.’

[S] I grew up in western Canada and have visited the western United States quite often. However, I have also traveled and read sufficiently to realize that the environment in which I live is rather unique. As far as I can tell, no other place in the whole world has such a lack of culture—so little sense of corporate history. I have had several conversations with Latin immigrants to Western Canada who are bewildered by our lack of emotional involvement. Eastern North America, in contrast, does have some history and some culture.

[T] This is because drive originates in the Exhorter part, which responds not only to positive but also to negative emotions. Both generate equal amounts of energy.

[U] This is how a child learns the vocabulary and the grammar of his mother tongue.

[V] This describes how the theory contained in this book took over my mind.

[W] We will see later that Exhorter excitement and boredom provide the motivation which drives a person to follow the latest theory and to abandon his old one.

[X] This is a concept which will be expanded in the next book.

[Y] This manipulation is a form of conscience; it therefore requires some sort of emotional ‘hook’ to be effective.

[Z] A Teacher ‘dictator’ does not always have Teacher instability—he may just be very set in his ideas. It is when the Teacher person uses the force of his personality to mold understanding that he turns into a ‘dictator.’ Similarly, I suggest that any person turns into a ‘dictator’ when he tries to use conscious processing to control the thinking of others.

[AA] Freud was a Facilitator person and not a Teacher person. However, the conflict still involved Teacher thought and intellectual interaction.

[BB] Little children also go through a “Why?” phase. While the question is the same, I suggest that the desired response is different. The Teacher person wants a theoretical explanation. The child, in contrast, is usually more curious about who is involved—he wants a pseudo-theory, and not a full-blown intellectual answer. Parents often confuse their children by giving an adult answer to a childish “Why?”

[CC] While both Teacher and Mercy persons can concentrate, mental focus in one mode can be broken by a disturbance in the opposite strategy. Therefore, if the Teacher person has real Mercy problems, then he will find that subconscious Mercy concentration interferes with conscious Teacher concentration. Similarly, if the understanding of the Mercy person falls apart, subconscious Teacher concentration may prevent him from focusing upon experiences. Lasting bad Teacher emotions can in fact pull the Mercy person into a very deep and continuing depression.

[DD] Personal transformation also uses positive Teacher feelings to make up for Mercy pain. But, the goal in this case is to transform me so that the Mercy discomfort can stop.

[EE] Exhorter strategy finds obsessive rituals exciting, Teacher thought builds ‘general’ understanding around them, and they act as defining experiences for Mercy mode.

[FF] This situation is now changing. People increasingly feel unable to handle emotional pressure, and they are therefore asking for physical restrictions to be extended to the realm of the emotions. Protests used to be based upon actual physical harassment; now there are complaints when individuals feelharassed. We answer this sensitivity with more physical rules: Don’t touch certain people. Don’t look at certain objects. Don’t say certain words.

[GG] Gadgets can also be accumulated for the status which they bring. This leads to a culture based upon approval conscience, otherwise known as ‘keeping up with the Joneses.’

[HH] That is the situation now in Vancouver, Canada where I live. The new subdivisions are full of what people call ‘monster homes.’ Likewise, our suburb of Abbotsford has about 100,000 inhabitants and over one hundred ‘places of worship.’

[II] Genuine Teacher comprehension does not have to worry about having its ideas stolen. That is because it can always use Teacher thought to come up with more material. A pseudo-theory, in contrast, must hold on to its intellectual property. Because Teacher thought is not really operating, it can never replace what is appropriated by others.

[JJ] The composite styles can see mental content, but they are not aware of cortical processing. Therefore, they are not consciously bothered by a world which contains pieces of meaning and intelligence, but which does not integrate them together.

[KK] The Perceiver and Server persons demand that the car ‘parts’ do not change. However, they are not naturally motivated to preserve an entire vehicle.

[LL] This term is technically correct. As Mercy feelings fade, Exhorter excitement takes over. Positive feelings diminish, and so pseudo-culture turns to the negative yet ever increasing excitement provided by the dirt and refuse of society.

[MM] Teacher and Mercy thought operate along independent dimensions. Teacher strategy is analytic, oriented around time and sequence. Mercy mode thinks associatively, linking space and objects. Therefore, it is possible to deal with Teacher and Mercy ‘multiple personalities’ and ‘schizophrenia’ separately—although there would be some overlap.

[NN] North Americans often pretend that the language problem does not exist. This is because English is spoken across most of the continent and is also the dominant language of the world. North American wealth, progress, and power allow English-speakers to ignore those who do not speak their tongue, and to reject their ideas as trivial and irrelevant.

[OO] The condition of Teacher schizophrenia is so prevalent in scientific circles that we have not yet been able to have this work evaluated. Usually a scientist says, “That is not my field.” If it is his field, then he generally states, “I am not qualified.” When push comes to shove, his final response is, “I am really very busy.”

[PP] The Contributor person is especially prone to this combination of external confidence and internal uncertainty. The growing Contributor teen can have very serious problems with poor self-image—it seems that nothing that parents do makes any difference.

[QQ] Summarizing why these various areas relate to the objective: The science of today studies the objective world and tries to avoid emotional topics; technology gives us new and improved objects but does not tell us how to enjoy them; capitalism is organized around the pursuit of external wealth and assumes that personal feelings will not interfere with business; democracy gives one vote to each adult physical body, regardless of the maturity of its desires and aspirations.

[RR] Earlier on, we looked at Germany as an example of Perceiver confidence. Now we see some of the dangers of rebuilding the me of the physical body with Perceiver confidence while allowing the me of Mercy identification to retain its childish worship of leaders and authorities. In terms of our country illustration, this combines a ‘German’ head with a ‘Russian’ heart. When mental development is halted in mid-stride, history shows that humans can turn into monsters. Today, I suggest that it is the United States, with its amazing economy, Disneyland mentality, and culture of rebellion, which is most ripe for racism and fascism. The Germans at least know the horrors of fascism and are trying to learn from their mistakes. The United States, in contrast, feels that the American way of freedom and prosperity will continue forever.

[SS] It is important to keep clear exactly what is happening, because Perceiver confidence and emotional 'facts' are appearing on the opposite sides of what one would expect. First of all, as before, Perceiver logic and confidence is being used to build up the me associated with our physical bodies. This leads to rational facts and categories based upon the physical bodies and external possessions of people. However, as with all Perceiver facts, confidence in these Perceiver divisions will crumble if confronted with sufficient emotional pressure. This emotional attack is coming from the me of Mercy identification and its emotional experiences with people of different race, gender or class.

[TT] This does not mean that we would ignore these differences. That is the path of objective thinking which suppresses feelings in order to preserve logic. Rather, we would acknowledge these distinctions and strive to surmount them.

[UU] Of course, these stories usually involve Contributor persons and external wealth. This is a natural aberration in a society which emphasizes objective knowledge. We will see that Contributor persons get ahead in our type of twisted environment precisely because they can use conscious control to combine rational thinking and application while still suppressing their emotions. I suggest, however, that the general principle remains valid.

[VV] It may be possible that all cases of multiple personalities (as defined in the current medical literature) involve Mercy persons. However, in order to make this statement, I would have to look in detail at a large number of incidents. At present, all I can say with certainty is that the information which I have read is consistent with my hypothesis that multiple personalities is a disease which happens to the Mercy person. Therefore, I say ‘usually’ and ‘possibly.’

[WW] Why do I refer to ‘the Judeo-Christian heritage’ as ‘our parents’? Because this belief system was the foundation of Western civilization, which in turn has grown to encompass the entire world. All other cultural systems have been affected by its way of thinking. These are the facts of history, politically incorrect though they may be.