Early in our European tradition Parmenides of Elea set forth his poetic vision of the universe. One part is called the "Way of Truth," the other, the "Way of Opinion." The two ways of Parmenides have been much discussed since his time. Philosophical commentators ask why Parmenides found it necessary to describe his vision in two contrasting ways. One would think that the way of truth would be enough. Why bother with a second description? But the fact remains: one way of telling was not enough. Even our Bible begins with two differing tales of the Creation.
In the long tradition since Parmenides, descriptions divide again and again into two ways. This is not merely the influence of tradition. These divisions point to some necessity of the human psyche to tell two kinds of tales about the nature of things. Jung tried to come to grips with this peculiar duality in the history of thought in his work Psychological Types,1 where he showed that the division into two ways of description arises from the psychological bias of the observer. This bias for one or another attitude gives the observer his conviction that one method achieves a way of "truth," while another way is less valid and its descriptions are mere "opinion." Inhis biography (Memories, Dreams, Reflections) 2 Jung takes these conclusions one step further. The two ways of envisioning the universe are reflections of two personalities within the individual—the rational and the irrational, the logical and the mythic, the civilized and the primitive, the man and the child.