Concept Clarifier in
separate window

Truth Seekers, Lie Swatters, & Worldview Defenders

These 3 categories overlap in practice, but like all categories, remain distinct in the abstract.  We can all benefit by contrasting their distinctions and similarities.  I propose the following for criticism, improvement, and additions.

Truth seekers try to learn more truth than they presently know.
Lie swatters try to expose lies wherever they find them.
Worldview defenders assert a particular worldview as truth, and will defend it with lies if necessary, unless their particular worldview forbids lying.

Truth seekers will swat lies whenever they happen to find them.
But they don't go looking for more lies, like lie swatters do.
Worldview defenders swat only those lies that threaten their worldview.

A truth seeker who has found enough truth to put a worldview together is likely to become a worldview defender.  But he will also remain a truth seeker, unless that is the only reason he became a truth seeker.
A lie swatter is likely to think lie swatting is truth seeking and possibly even a worldview.
A worldview defender may have found no truth beyond what is necessary to defend or sell his product.
Only worldview defenders are evangelical, in which case they become worldview sellers.

A truth seeker will admit his errors as soon as he recognizes them.
A lie swatter may do likewise depending on his integrity level.
A worldview defender will admit errors after he has thought of a work around to nullify any damage caused.

Truth seekers experiment.
Lie swatters read.
Worldview defenders read more selectively.

Truth seekers always clarify issues.
Lie swatters clarify the lies they are trying to swat, but may not care about clarification otherwise.
Worldview defenders clarify when right, and obfuscate when wrong.

Truth seekers answer questions honestly without concern for the consequences of their answer.
Lie swatters do likewise, unless they think a particular question is asked in effort to deflect exposure of a lie they are focused on.
Worldview defenders are likely to ask, "Where are you going with it?" before answering a question.

A truth seeker will examine the subject of values to see what moral hierarchy they belong in.
A lie swatter may not assume that exposing lies is the highest value, but will assume that it's always good.
A worldview defender assumes belief in his worldview to be the highest value, unless his worldview says otherwise.

A truth seeker is probably not an indiscriminate truth seeker.  He will not seek truth that is irrelevant, or if the effort to find it costs more than the value of having found it.
A lie swatter is probably not an indiscriminate lie swatter.  He will find some lies more worthy of exposing than others.
A worldview defender is probably not fanatical.  He will allow himself enough hypocrisy to be comfortable.

The games they play:
Truth seekers play solitaire.  They want to see which card arrangements win, and which ones lose.
Lie swatters play chess.  They try to think at least one step ahead of their opponent.
Worldview defenders play chess too, but they also play poker when they think they can bluff their way to victory.

Their main general constituents:
truth seekers:  philosophers and scientists
lie swatters:  politicos
worldview defenders:  religionists

Philosophers and scientists are necessarily truth seekers, until they sell out.
Politicos are truncated worldview defenders, i.e. viewpoint defenders.
Religionists are worldview defenders with creeds, doctrines, and miscellaneous bells and whistles.

What they like to call themselves:
Truth seekers like to call themselves truth seekers.
Lie swatters like to call themselves truth seekers.
Worldview defenders like to call themselves truth seekers.