Welcome to the Post-Factual Era (Nov 9, 2016)

Homo Sapiens first appeared about 200,000 years ago. Though the concept of reason was introduced in classical Greece 2400 years ago, it was not until about 400 years ago that Descartes ushered in the Age of Reason. So, for 99% of our existence, we were not rational creatures. We believed that our prayers made the sun come up or that a pattern of stars in the sky was a bear. Perhaps the transition towards reason was a result of the evolution of the cortical layers of the brain.

Once the valuing of rationality took hold, it did so with a vengeance. Any way of being in the world that did not prioritize reason was derided as "primitive" or worse. As leading with intuition or feeling is associated in certain systems with feminine qualities, this shift aligned with a movement towards patriarchal societies that began about 6000 years ago. Feelings were to be tamed and mysticism was to be stamped out. Logical thinking supports the ability to create better weapons and wage war, adding further dominance to the rational way of being. As the world became disenchanted, our lives lost meaning and we became alienated from our environment.

Clearly, the pendulum had swung too far towards reason. We were actually destroying the planet that we need to support us. Perhaps the 1960's marks the beginning of the rebellion against reason and a revaluing of intuition, emotion, trusting the flow, and chaos. Americans became curious about Eastern and indigenous cultures and religions, and more ecologically minded. We were advised to "follow the heart." We understood that just because science can't measure something, that doesn't make it unreal.

Have you seen the "It's Not About the Nail" video? (Spoiler alert: watch it here before reading further.) At first, I thought it was making fun of the woman with the nail in her forehead. But when I showed it to a couple in a therapy session, the wife agreed with her position, and I was enlightened. There are now strong voices for non-rational perspectives in our culture. As therapists, we understand that just because someone can win an argument through judicious deployment of facts, that doesn't make their perspective any more true.

Ideally, we would recognize the value of rational and non-rational approaches, and we would find a judicious balance between them. Unfortunately, they instead tend to become polarized, much as Republicans and Democrats are. Fact lovers are outraged by those who ignore them, as represented by Bill Maher's recurring "Republican fact-free bubble" bit. Trump (and Brexit) supporters have shown by their votes that they refuse to be dominated by intellectuals wielding facts.

It is worth noting that in this election, Hillary Clinton presented a masculine approach to facts, while Trump exhibited a more feminine approach.

One type of statement worth examining as beneficially trans-factual is the declaration. Many of the statements we make are inherently non-verifiable, and thereby non-factual. In fact, most of our most important beliefs fall into this category: "I am lovable / valuable / good." "I have enough." "Everything is going to be OK." This type of statement is immune to scientific scrutiny, making it eligible for declaration; we create the truth of it by declaring it and believing it.

It is crucial to distinguish between factual and declarative statements. If we continue to look for verification of a declarative statement such as "It's going to be OK," we lose the opportunity to create such an important and beneficial reality. On the other hand, if we go around declaring things that belong in the factual realm, such as "real estate values will always rise," we are prone to making bad decisions. When extreme, we call this tendency psychosis.

Donald Trump created his empire largely through the power of declaration. His statements about the value of his properties have convinced enough people so that the properties actually acquire that value. In his campaign for President, he has made similar declarative statements that properly belong in the realm of fact; it remains to be seen what the consequences of that will be.

One last take-away from this distinction: Don't let your distaste of declaring truths that contradict facts rob you of the power of declaring truths that fall safely in the realm of declaration. And, I declare that the following will be an AWESOME workshop!