Navigating anxiety through defense mechanisms: a truth perspective on human ignorance and awareness

Бюллетень науки и практики / Bulletin of Science and Practice

UDC 159.9                                         

The theory of Truthism is a new and emerging concept in the field of psychology, aiming to present a fresh perspective and examine the human being from a novel viewpoint. This theory is in the early stages of its development, having undergone experimental and theoretical phases, and is still in the process of testing its philosophical assumptions.

First, I must explain the reasons for proposing this approach and theory, why I wrote about it, and why I believe that interpreting the human psyche through this framework is not only more effective but also more rational.

Our known world, or to be more cautious, the known nature of our planet, operates entirely based on and within the framework of dialectics. Nature evolves, changes, and develops through dialectics, and this development is aligned with the laws of physics and nature.

The fundamental law of nature is dialectical, and this law governs us as small parts of this vast body. The human understanding is dialectical in nature, and it comprehends and perceives based on dialectical principles.

Now, the essential question:

Since the surrounding nature, the human understanding, and the human body evolve or change based on dialectics, shouldn't human behavior and decisions also be based on dialectics, free from prejudice, and in acceptance of what is undeniable?

Isn't it more rational that our interpretation and understanding of humans, their life, and existence also be based on dialectics?

All of our social, economic, and scientific progress, as well as the comfort and well-being we enjoy, have come about through the acceptance of what is more accurate and through an unbiased outlook. The researcher now questions why the interpretation and analysis of the human psyche should not also be based on dialectics, free from prejudice, and in the pursuit of truth?

The insight and discourse of this theory and approach are built around the principle that human beings are inherently truth-seeking, and this instinct can influence and govern human behavior and actions [2]. I have termed this characteristic the “Instinct of Truth-Seeking” [1, 2].

The most fundamental need for human survival, after oxygen and water, is the need to understand truths. From the smallest to the most grand and philosophical, understanding truths is essential for human existence. From the early stages of life—understanding how to communicate with our mothers and the world around us, to express our needs (often through reflexes in early life)—to comprehending other truths, like how to walk, how to avoid danger, how to interact with other children, and progressing to grasping behavioral, ethical, social, philosophical, and scientific truths, all are critical and precede any other human need.

The core element of the theory is the truth and the human drive for truth-seeking. A person’s interaction with, acceptance, or rejection of truths is what determines their mental well-being or distress. Truth is the oldest, strongest, and deepest concept in existence, and according to its definition, truth is the essence and core of everything, bearing a theoretical aspect. For every individual, truth varies and is different [3]. Truth is the highest and most significant focus of human attention, and throughout every moment of life, humans are constantly in the process of understanding, submitting to, or rejecting truth. Therefore, from the author’s perspective, truth is a concept that profoundly affects the human psyche, and how one understands and engages with it can create harmony or discord within the mind.

We all know that truth differs from one culture or region to another, and every worldview has its unique definition of truth. Every individual perceives it differently, and no one can claim with certainty where truth lies or where it is seated. Not only do truths change over time, but they also constantly move towards improvement, refinement, and elevation through unbiased consideration. Due to this multifaceted and alluring nature of truth, in this approach, the author has reduced and narrowed the word “truth” to the term Truthlet, which represents what is factual and real. Truthlet

refers to the truth an individual has reached up to the present moment and carries a more limited meaning compared to the broader concept of truth [2].

A Truthlet is a truth that holds meaning as truth only for the individual, and it is valid and real solely within their world and according to their circumstances. It may hold no particular value or significance for anyone else, and only this Truthlet and the individual’s belief in it can influence their life, affecting their psyche and decisions. For example, a person’s perspective on a specific philosophy might be a Truthlet for them, but it could hold no value for others. Or, more simply, a traditional or cultural practice, like visiting relatives, might be a Truthlet with personal and significant value for one individual, while for another it may lack social importance.

Truthlets are, in fact, beliefs, content, and mental concepts that we accept, and they give power and direction to our behaviors and decisions. The impact of Truthlets on our understanding of the world around us is such that they shape how we interact with others and how we behave. Our psychological responses are influenced by them. For instance, someone who, when faced with anxiety, reacts with emotional outbursts, restlessness, and withdrawal, or someone who, when confronted with a distressing issue, seeks out a friend or counselor, reflects in solitude, takes a walk, or, in a debate with an opposing view, reacts aggressively. Similarly, one might see leisure as overeating, dancing, or watching movies, while another values socializing.

In essence, whatever a person does is rooted in the Truthlet or belief they hold, which guides their responses in those situations. In reality, Truthlets and certainties form the content and psychological framework of each individual, and this mental-psychological framework shapes their behavior [2].

Dewey says that scientific theories differ over time. A theory is introduced and presented when it has an effect, but when a new phenomenon is discovered and the previous theory is no longer effective, it is discarded. As Dewey points out, a theory is a tool, and like all tools, it may be useful at one time and not at another. When this theory is good and effective, it can be called “truth,” but the word "truth" should not be confused with its eternal meaning in this context. Dewey uses the term “warranted assertion” instead of the word “truth”.

The term "Truthlet" carries a similar concept to Dewey's "warranted assertion," as each individual's Truthlet changes upon encountering newer and more accurate truths, influenced by Cognitive and Behavioral Dialectic, Truthletfullness, and Truthletism, which act towards continual refinement.

The Cognitive and Behavioral Dialectic, Truthletfullness, and Truthletism are elaborated in another article [2], but I will briefly discuss them here. Through dialectics, humans engage in discovering new truths and understanding the world around them, a process that begins at birth. Just as the regular function of the heart is to beat and pump blood, dialectic is the normal function of the human brain [4]. In fact, raw data received from the environment becomes a perceived truth in the present moment, or Truthlet, through dialectics. This truth holds significance only for the individual. For example, the temperature of the surroundings, or an anxiety-provoking or joyful issue, is something that holds meaning solely for the individual and is their Truthlet.

Learning, throughout all stages of life and starting from birth, takes place through dialectics (both mental and practical), and it is through this process that humans acquire truths and reach understanding. Dialectic is, in essence, the human attempt at trial and error to arrive at both small and large truths they encounter. It occurs in all cognitive and behavioral aspects of human life, bringing about a new synthesis or understanding at every moment. Reflexes or instincts (if we believe in instinct) are the primary Truthlets and theses of humans, and it can easily be said that all human behavior and understanding are the products of the dialectic interaction that occurs between the individual and their environment, other people, or themselves from the moment of birth [2].

Humans acquire all cognitive and behavioral truths through dialectics. Even what is received through the five senses (which today are known to be more than five) is understood and analyzed through dialectics until it becomes known and experienced. In this approach, humans do not have prior or innate knowledge; what they possess are hereditary elements (instincts) or reflexes.

In this school of thought, to implement the concept of truth-seeking and open-mindedness, and to bridge the gap between humanity's success in advancing other sciences (such as physics or chemistry) and the realm of psychology and thought, as well as to facilitate the understanding, acceptance of new truths, or Truthlets, and learning, the concept of Cognitive and Behavioral Dialectic has been proposed. This is based on Hegelian dialectics and operates within a small and simple philosophical system where any input or information received ultimately results in Truthlets that align with the broader framework of this theory and school of thought, which focuses on the pursuit of truths and the principle of open-mindedness.

The principle of open-mindedness in the philosophical system of Cognitive and Behavioral Dialectic is essentially pure doubt, not skeptical doubt. In this approach, the individual says, "I assume this is the case, but I am not certain," or, "I do not know how it is, but I hope to discover it." However, they will never say with skeptical doubt, "I do not know, and no one else will ever know either."

Cognitive and Behavioral Dialectic is defined as follows: every Truthlet or perceived truth in the present moment is the product of dialectic or reasoning, and everything the individual perceives is, "for now," a fact or Truthlet (thesis). Every moment, they encounter another Truthlet (antithesis), and the synthesis of these two Truthlets forms a new thesis or Truthlet. In fact, synthesis is the retention of the correct result obtained from the confrontation of the two previous premises.

The small and simple philosophical system of this dialectic operates based on two principles:

• 1.    Open-mindedness and free thinking

• 2.    Experiential learning and pragmatism

To apply this simple and small philosophical system to human psychology and behavior, and to simplify its elements in our actions and thoughts, two concepts have been introduced: Truthletfullness and Truthletism, so that we can easily observe the truths and Truthlets around us and also discover the path of elevation to find higher and better Truthlets.

Truthletism and Truthletfullness are defined as follows:

Truthletfullness: Every individual must observe the truths and Truthlets surrounding them and reflect on them. This process occurs within the framework of open-mindedness, because many of the Truthlets and truths around us are in conflict with our current Truthlets and beliefs. Until a person frees themselves from the mental rigidity and bias of their current beliefs, they will not be able to see Truthlets that oppose their own. Therefore, one must observe the truths and Truthlets around them, even those that are in opposition to their own Truthlets, and reflect on them.

Truthletism: Whenever an individual encounters a new Truthlet or a truth that conflicts with their current belief, they must accept the Truthlet or truth that is closer to collective human wisdom and reason. The discovery of Truthlets and truths endorsed by wisdom is not only found in written texts, but we can also observe the Truthlets and beliefs of the people of prosperous and advanced countries. The current prosperity and happiness of these people and countries is the result of their adherence to the ideas and beliefs of the wise and rational individuals who preceded them.

In fact, Truthism is rooted in the philosophy of rationalism and stems from the core teachings of Plato and Socrates, particularly the principle of "I do not know" and the idea that ultimate truths are unreachable. It is also grounded in Hegelian philosophy and dialectic, with traces of Spinozan ethics present. What Freud did with Schopenhauer's philosophy, and what Binswanger and Rollo

May did with the philosophies of Sartre, Kierkegaard, and Nietzsche, I have done with rationalist philosophy, giving its concepts and elements a psychological flavor.

Cognitive and Behavioral Dialectic is essentially a refinement of the traditional Hegelian dialectic. Just as Hegel added dynamism and fluidity to Aristotle's static and linear logic and laid the foundation for dialectics, I have established Cognitive and Behavioral Dialectic by introducing Truthletism and the obligatory rule of accepting what is closer to the opinion and judgment of wise people and leaders of peers. My aim is to elevate and, even if only modestly or optimistically, guide the dialectic process upwards with this rule.

Russell says that while science is studied with great care and effort, in the future, it will undoubtedly be severely restricted to the ruling class, and the masses will not be allowed to understand how different beliefs are formed in them (The Impact of Science on Society, p. 47). Therefore, to free ourselves from the dominance of authority figures and to maintain a calm mind and control over our destiny and self, we must compare our beliefs, which are our current truths or Truthlets, with the other beliefs and Truthlets around us (Truthletfullness). We should accept the belief and Truthlet that is closer to the consensus of the wise and the leaders of peers (Truthletism).

It is crucial to note that often when we hear or see the word "truth," the concept that comes to mind is always profound, philosophical, or scientific. When someone says, "This is the truth," what the listener or reader imagines is something grand, philosophical, and perhaps distant. We tend to see it as separate from everyday life and assume that the truth being stated relates to science, philosophy, or wisdom and has little relevance to our day-to-day life. However, in reality, the scope and dimensions of the word "truth" cover everything from the smallest matters to the largest ones. Every event, occurrence, or entity reflects a truth within the context of that matter, occurrence, or entity.

For example, every behavior or physical characteristic of an individual is a Truthlet about that person. Likewise, every small or large and distinctive feature of an object is a "truth" about that object.

Up to this point, I have provided a brief explanation of the theory of Truthism, its philosophical structure, and its perspective on and analysis of human behavior. Now, I will proceed to define anxiety and stress, followed by Ig-Anxiety (the anxiety of ignorance).

Stress and Anxiety in the Theory of Truthism. In a previous article, I thoroughly defined stress and anxiety within the framework of Truthism and identified ignorance as the root cause of anxiety and stress. Here, I will briefly define stress and anxiety within this philosophy.

Anxiety, worry, or unease is an unpleasant, diffuse, and ambiguous feeling with an unknown source that overwhelms a person. It involves uncertainty, helplessness, and physiological arousal. In psychology, anxiety is considered the advanced stage of chronic stress. Stress is essential for survival and is a natural human response to pressure — whether psychological or physiological — and its origin is clear. Demands, decisions, frustrations, pains, expectations, and so forth all cause stress, manifesting as psychological and physiological pressure.

Stress is a vital characteristic of every living organism from a biological perspective, and without it, survival is impossible. If a being does not experience stress related to survival, health, self-defense, safety, progress, lack of connection, etc., it is destined for extinction. Stress is a condition that arises from the interaction between an individual and their environment, causing a mismatch — whether real or perceived—between the demands of a situation and the individual’s biological, psychological, and social resources (Sarafino, translated by Shafiee and colleagues, 2019).

The most widely accepted definition of stress, often attributed to Richard Lazarus, is that stress is a condition or feeling experienced when a person perceives that their demands exceed the

personal and social resources available to them. Lazarus and Folkman (1984) define stress as a specific relationship between a person and the environment in which the tension surpasses the individual’s capabilities and threatens their health [5].

The researcher believes that stress is related to our level of awareness and knowledge because the more we know about a particular issue, the less stress we experience in that area. In fact, if we are more informed and knowledgeable about a specific stressful issue, it feels as though we have control over it, and the situation is in our hands [1].

From the researcher's perspective, the more knowledgeable and informed a person is in any given area, the less stress they will endure when facing challenges in that field. Truths and knowledge effectively eliminate stress. The issue of awareness and knowing the truth and its impact on stress is also evident in matters of self-confidence and low self-esteem [1].

Stress can be addressed and resolved through practical actions, and certainly, in the context of Truthletfullness and Truthletism—that is, recognizing and accepting the truths around us. Longstanding and unresolved stresses logically transform into anxiety [1].

In fact, when stress is not resolved, the psychological pressure it creates leads to more stress (even in other areas). As we become overwhelmed with worry and discomfort, we face multiple causes and sources of stress, making it difficult for us to identify them, and we ultimately fall into anxiety.

Anxiety and Stress in the Theory of Truthism. According to the logic of unresolved stress, the psychological pressure it creates leads to more profound and vague stressors, which we then refer to as "anxiety." The reason for the confusion between the two concepts of anxiety and stress — and the interchange of these two terms in discussions of the social sciences — stems from the points and processes mentioned earlier. The psychological pressure that has a clear root and cause is termed "stress," while the psychological pressure and unease with unclear or unknown roots is termed "anxiety" [1].

In other schools of thought and psychoanalysis, there is a concept known as "normal anxiety," which refers to anxiety and psychological pressure that can guide and assist us, showing us the correct path, such as the anxiety a driver feels when driving a dilapidated vehicle on a rainy road. However, in this approach, the roots of "anxieties" are generally not identified, and the concept of "normal anxiety" does not exist within this theory [1]. This theory introduces "anxiety" as an undesirable phenomenon and considers what is referred to in other theories and schools of thought as "normal anxiety" as simply "stress" [1], which I have discussed in detail in previous articles.

Anxiety always improves when connected to a specific object or situation. Anxiety must transform into fear, a tangible and specific entity, located in time and space, to be comprehensible and acceptable to human understanding. In essence, the object must be rendered concrete and idealized. This is also the primary endeavor of psychologists and psychoanalysts: to recognize anxiety and convert it into fear so that it can be controlled. Typically, a normal individual either avoids the object or source of fear or designs a specific plan to overcome their fear through desensitization or other means [1].

In the Truthism approach, the subject or the self (in the Cartesian sense, as an entity possessing experience and consciousness that perceives the object) is also very important. The situation or object that causes fear or anxiety is dependent on the subject and the individual; it is the individual who fears a particular object or experiences anxiety due to a certain situation. However, the same object may not be a source of anxiety (or fear) for another individual, so the subject's perception and viewpoint regarding the object are crucial. The individual's perception of a situation or object depends on their viewpoints, mental concepts, experiences, and cognitive and psychological capacities. In reality, the level of an individual's awareness, their commitment to

Truthletfulness, and their desire for truth-seeking and acceptance significantly influence the level of anxiety (and fear) they perceive. The more complete, accurate, and rational the truths accepted by the individual concerning a specific subject or object, the less anxiety (or fear and stress) they will experience regarding that subject or object [1].

The truths and realities that an individual believes in and accepts about a subject or environment significantly affect the anxiety (and stress) they derive from that subject or environment.

Personal Experiences, the Mental-Psychological Framework, and Hereditary Deposits of Humanity. Personal experiences, the subjective-psychological framework, and hereditary deposits of individuals — resulting from their life conditions, environment, mental-psychological capabilities, and genetics — make each person so unique that their reactions to disturbing and fearinducing factors are distinctive. Anxiety is such a subject-centered phenomenon that no single factor can definitively be considered the cause of anxiety for all of humanity.

Even factors that appear to be influential, such as financial and economic problems, the death of loved ones, and the psychological pressure resulting from war and violence — which seem to create fear, stress, and ultimately anxiety for everyone—cannot be deemed as definitive causes of anxiety for all humans.

Modern cognitive sciences tell us that not only can we not categorize a person into a specific personality type and claim exactly how much mental and emotional capacity they have, but even the notion of a "stable personality" or "fixed self" is now considered a myth. It is incorrect to label someone as introverted or extroverted or to categorize them within a particular psychological or personality classification. Similarly, stating that a specific factor causes anxiety for a particular individual with a specific mental condition or personality type is erroneous. For instance, saying that a person who experienced castration anxiety in childhood will be anxious about a specific event in adulthood, or that a person’s current anxiety stems from an Oedipal complex, is incorrect. We can say that a person’s current anxiety has a significant correlation with their childhood castration anxiety or Oedipal complex; however, these are not the only causes of their current anxiety. Recent research shows that humans are so unique, and their psyche and personality are influenced by numerous factors, that categorizing and stating that a single factor is definitively the cause of anxiety is illogical and unwise.

When theorists claim that the only causes of anxiety are conditioning, modeling, repression of desires, discrepancies between self-concept and ideal self, existential death, or an inappropriate interpretation of events, and illogical beliefs, they are following a misguided path. Each of these factors cannot independently create anxiety for all individuals. Due to the uniqueness of human personality and psyche and the varying environmental and social conditions, these factors can only lead to anxiety for some individuals and not for all humanity.

In reality, it is a collection of unresolved stresses that create anxiety for us, and "the true root and cause of these stresses are individual ignorance and lack of awareness".

For example, does the existentialist school’s analysis of the causes of anxiety adequately address someone who embraces death through the teachings of Eastern philosophy, viewing it as a phase of life and believing that death reduces one phase of their reincarnation?

My question to counselors and psychologists is whether, during counseling and therapy, they view the cause of an individual’s anxiety solely as repression of desires, or the mismatch between self-concept and ideal self, or merely as unreasonable expectations and illogical beliefs? Or do they consider that the cause of an individual’s anxiety might be one of the factors discussed in various schools, and we should see which cause allows for a better psychological analysis and therapeutic approach?

Today, we understand that every event or factor — whether it’s scientific discoveries, various news and information, deep and impactful experiences such as marriage or meeting someone, financial or physical injuries, and even everyday occurrences — affects a person's perspective and choices, and these choices subsequently influence their destiny, which then alters their personality and mental state. Therefore, it seems reasonable to assert that only "ignorance" can be viewed as a singular and definitive cause of anxiety for humanity.

The Unique Nature of Human Personality and Anxiety. The personality and psychological states of individuals undergo such changes over time and through daily experiences that what can cause anxiety or fear today may not provoke the same feelings in the future. With a little insight, we can see that the object that can cause fear or anxiety for a subject at any time and stage is solely the ignorance and lack of awareness of the subject regarding that specific object, and not any other factor.

What is a source of anxiety for one individual may not be so for another, and what once caused anxiety for an individual may no longer do so today. Additionally, the subject-centered nature of anxiety and the variability of personality and psychological states over time and through daily experiences—always rich with new experiences — change so profoundly that what may cause anxiety or fear today may no longer do so in the future as personality evolves.

Human personality is unique. The psychological capacities of different individuals vary, and the environmental experiences and their effects on the psyche and personality are subject-centered, dependent on the individual’s capacity and understanding. Therefore, over time, which is always filled with new experiences for an individual, the impact of those experiences on the psyche and personality, and considering the subject-centered nature of anxiety and its dependence on the individual’s personality and psyche, the only factor that can cause anxiety for all of humanity, across various psychological levels, is "ignorance".

Ignorance is the primary source and origin of anxieties and, consequently, the main cause of psychological disorders. Being unaware of a subject or phenomenon and lacking knowledge about it is always challenging and causes psychological pressure for individuals. Our various ignorances in different subjects and phenomena generate psychological pressure and ultimately lead to anxiety. For example, pain from a serious illness causes psychological pressure, but what exacerbates this pressure and transforms it into anxiety is the individual's ignorance and lack of awareness of their fate—whether it be recovery from the illness or death. This intertwined anxiety about death is a result of ignorance because no one knows what awaits them after death. In fact, the anxiety about death is the anxiety born from ignorance.

There are many such examples, and if we delve deeply into these matters, we will see that the root of anxieties lies in our lack of awareness or ignorance. This reasoning leads me to assert that the only factor that can create anxiety for all of humanity is ignorance.

Ignorance is the only factor that can generate anxiety for every human being, under any circumstances, and in any place or environment. This inclination prompts me to conceptualize an anxiety termed "Ig-Anxiety" for humanity.

Ig-Anxiety. Anxiety is not just an emotion among others like pleasure or sadness. Rather, anxiety is more of a characteristic or state of "human truth-seeking" in response to ignorance, which is inherent in human existence.

The failure to follow and completely disregard truths is the primary source of all anxieties. With the help of our truth-seeking spirit and our innate desire to understand truths (the desire for the dynamism of truths), we can overcome these anxieties. The root of psychological disorders stems from an inadequate and inappropriate response to these anxieties.

Every human being is condemned to know; from the moment of birth, they seek truth and knowledge. Individuals instinctively pursue the elimination of ignorance and the discovery of the world around them, knowing that survival necessitates awareness and the removal of ignorance. These ignorances can be philosophical, ideological, or related to physical pain. They can concern the outcome of life or the causes of misfortune, or they may be as trivial as how to reach a destination or what to eat, and every other simple matter.

Such ignorances inevitably create tension and psychological pressure, and we know that unresolved stresses and old pressures lead to anxiety. This anxiety arises from ignorance; these disturbances and troubles stem from a lack of awareness and unknowns.

From the moment a person opens their eyes in the morning, they are constantly comparing, choosing, and making decisions. What should they do today? Should they get out of bed now or sleep a little longer? Should they wash their face first or eat something? What should they eat? Which path should they take? What should they wear? And so on.

It goes without saying that for every action, decision, and comparison, we need awareness and truth. And what better truth and data could there be than the surrounding truths and the established realities we express? This process continues until death and oscillates like a sine wave, varying in depth and intensity.

Ignorance and any type of unknowns, regardless of how minor or major, certainly create unease in specific contexts. If these unknowns and lack of information are shallow and have a clear and apparent root, the outcome is fear and the creation of stress, such as when driving, not knowing if one will arrive at their destination on time or not, or wondering how today’s meal will taste for the guests.

However, if our ignorance is so deep that it causes us distress, and we do not know the root of that unease, we fall into anxiety: “Ig-Anxiety”.

The reason a person experiences tension and anxiety is due to their failure to consider the surrounding truths (truthlets) and their ignorance and detachment from these truths. In my view, tracing the root cause of an individual's anxiety can often be linked to their inability to confront and accept these evident truths. For example, if someone is suffering from a type of anxiety disorder, such as panic disorder or social anxiety, what could be the cause? If a person fears social situations or is afraid of speaking in front of others, what could be the root cause of this fear other than a lack of understanding of a clear truth? Where does their lack of self-confidence stem from? Isn't the clear cause that they have not recognized their own capabilities and inherent truths, or that it has not become evident to them that groups and crowds are most likely not dangerous or threatening?

Now, what should they do? Apart from confronting and accepting the current truths, what other remedy is there? Is there a better solution than engaging in cognitive-behavioral dialectics and accepting what is closer to rational judgment—that speaking with and being among people is very likely safe? Is the flaw in their ineffective behavior and the cause of their current anxiety not rooted in an erroneous belief or truth accepted in the past, whether distant or recent? Shouldn't they now accept the clear truth to free themselves from this pain and ineffectiveness?

Failure to confront ignorance and to acknowledge it prevents us from overcoming our other fears and anxieties, hindering our improvement and growth. Whenever a person fails to pursue truths and disregards them, they become anxious. A person is responsible before the truths, and to live, they need to understand these truths and eliminate their ignorance. Life is intertwined with discovering truths, and it is impossible to live without truth-seeking. Does not the newborn, who has just entered this world, have any other option for survival and existence but to seek the truths and established facts around them?

Humans are responsible before truths, and they are the judges of their own existence. One must pay attention to their doubts about anything and any beliefs, pursue them, and resolve them to the extent of their understanding. They should disregard prior beliefs, critically examine any doubts they have about their knowledge and beliefs, and proceed towards knowledge and truth without prejudice.

Failing to do this brings about a fundamental anxiety, which I call "Ig-Anxiety." It is an anxiety about what one has not thought about and has repressed because, as Lord Russell said, "thinking is difficult."

In life, the greatest challenge an individual faces is the challenges of awareness and knowledge. The unresolved nature of these stressful challenges transforms into "Ig-Anxiety." In the theory of Truthism, the fundamental drive of the organism, whose suppression leads to neurosis, is the drive to pursue truths. Humans fight not so much for pleasure or power but to understand and reach the truths. In fact, our well-being lies in our understanding of truths and realities and in being free from prejudice, where the most vibrant feeling is that of open-mindedness.

From the moment of birth, every human is intertwined with ignorance, and ignorance is woven into the fabric of life. We involuntarily deny our ignorance and selectively ignore it. Although ignorance can destroy a person, awareness of one’s ignorance and understanding one’s ignorance can lead to a higher level of life.

Ignorance is the primary and initial source of anxieties. It has existed since the beginning of our lives and shapes our personality structure. Ignorance accompanies us throughout our lives, resulting in overt anxiety and the formation of psychological defenses. Psychological disorders are the outcome of anxiety and the defenses an individual employs to combat it.

When our ignorance becomes so profound that our defense mechanisms cannot modulate and soften it, we experience Ig-Anxiety. The obsessive efforts of many middle-aged men and women to remain youthful, their hypochondriacal worries about health and appearance, engaging in promiscuous behaviors to prove their youth and ability, the sense of emptiness and lack of enjoyment in life, the rise in religious and ideological interests, the desire for solitude, and the glorification of this state as rational—all stem from a deep denial of ignorance and the fundamental anxiety arising from it.

Ig-Anxiety is a human characteristic and state that drives individuals toward truths and the elimination of ignorance. Ig-Anxiety always embodies an internal conflict within oneself, specifically the conflict between our knowledge and our ignorances. This anxiety arises when an individual confronts their own ignorances, and the lack of awareness of their current state overwhelms them. It is, in fact, the unresolved stress of the individual in the face of a challenge that lacks a foundation. The individual faces a potentiality or possibility that is in the process of development—a possibility for understanding and addressing their ignorances, which simultaneously necessitates the destruction of their current security. As a result, the desire to deny this new potential emerges within them.

Anxiety is deeply connected to the pursuit of truth because, when we are anxious and our existence is at risk, it is this confrontation and understanding of truths that alleviates our anxiety. Thus, if an individual fails to perceive the surrounding truths and realities—no matter how minimal they may be—they lack the ability to alleviate their anxiety.

The search for truth may instead induce inner tension rather than balance, occurring when an individual is confronted with a vast volume of truths that they are unable to digest and resolve, leading to Ig-Anxiety. Mental health and well-being are dependent on the pursuit of truths, yet this health is based on a certain level of tension. This tension is, in fact, the discovery of truth, and the absence of tension is a dangerous misconception. A person needs the dynamism of thought and the quest for truth, which inherently creates a bipolar field of tension. One pole represents the truth that will be realized due to existential necessity, while the other pole is the individual who must attain that truth, creating tension for the individual.

Rank describes anxiety as a birth trauma, suggesting that all anxieties fall under this umbrella. Indeed, upon our birth, we face a horrific trauma. We are confronted with the reality that our survival necessitates a critical understanding of our truths and realities. Birth strikes us with a horrifying impact, making us aware of the extent of our ignorance in the new environment and conditions. It emphasizes the crucial fact that for survival and life, we need to understand and accept truths.

In my opinion, Ig-Anxiety begins from a very young age or even at the moment of birth when the newborn enters this world. The newborn reacts to this entry and change of environment with crying and distress. They are expelled from a safe, warm environment where everything was provided and find themselves in a world where they have no experience or knowledge, rendering them incapable of surviving in this new environment. The question then arises: does the fetus have awareness and knowledge of its environment that now leads it to feel ignorance upon entering this world?

The fetus in the womb has all its needs automatically fulfilled and does not require specific capabilities, awareness, or knowledge to meet those needs. Ability always follows knowledge; when needs are resolved in the womb, the discussion of capability becomes irrelevant as the fetus does not need awareness or knowledge. However, upon entering the new world, the newborn finds itself incapable, confused, and ignorant about this new environment.

It interacts and engages dialectically with the world and its parents through the reflexes or instincts with which it is born. By complying with and utilizing these reflexes—its only weapons or tools for survival—it continues to live. Reflexes (or instincts, if one believes in them) represent the foundational truths and beliefs that the newborn begins to accept and use in life. For example, the newborn instinctively sucks with its oral reflex, thereby commencing its life by complying with this inherent truth (the reflexes or instincts).

After birth, the newborn requires a caregiver and cannot survive even a single day without its parents. Leaving the secure environment and the absence of a caregiver is distressing; however, what fundamentally causes its anxiety is its lack of awareness and ignorance about the new environment, along with its inability to address its needs. Logically, we understand that this lack of ability stems from a lack of awareness and knowledge because "to know is to be able".

Thus, the foundational anxiety that has formed in the newborn for survival and existence is, in fact, the "Ig-Anxiety." The newborn does not know how to "address" its needs, and to "know" and "be able," it requires understanding and "truths." This truth pertains to how it desires something and how it connects with the environment. From the very beginning, it steps into this world with institutional truths—its instincts and reflexes — and by following these truths and reflexes, it cries or sucks. Instinctively, it realizes that, after oxygen and water, it requires the understanding of "truth and awareness" to survive. It must become aware of how to desire, how to move, how to meet its needs, how to communicate, and everything else. It needs to learn these processes and, to do so, it must confront and learn from the truths of these processes. Here, it understands that it must accept the obvious and the clear truth, remain unbiased, and learn a new truth for survival at every moment, setting aside previous truths and beliefs. It realizes that accepting the truth and being unbiased is essential for survival, and accepting what is evident is imperative.

Upon entering this world, it becomes anxious about its unknowns and experiences a "horrifying blow" as it confronts its fundamental ignorance in a new environment of which it has no knowledge, leading to "Ig-Anxiety." Freud once said that a child seeks to know where it came from.

However, in my view, this question is more about seeking to overcome ignorance than having a sexual connotation. The child wants to know where it came from, not how and by what means it arrived, which leads us to mistakenly think that its question has a sexual aspect (even though this could be a subsequent question in later years). Parents attempt to address this ignorance and the resulting anxiety through denial or by providing answers based on myths and religion. However, the child does not cease questioning and, at every age, seeks to understand the world and eliminate ignorance in its own way. Suppressing this inquisitiveness is, in fact, suppressing the human "desire for truth", resulting in an anxious individual suffering from "fundamental anxiety of ignorance".

John Bowlby concludes that separations are the first experiences in forming human anxiety and considers separation anxiety as fundamental, stating that other anxieties derive their emotional significance from this one. In all mammals, when a child is separated from its mother, signs of distress and suffering become evident, both in terms of external behaviors and internal physiological signs.

It is essential to note that this anxiety arises from separation from the caregiver, not merely from the parent. The newborn or child, upon separation from the parent, genuinely finds itself incapable and alone; it is clear that this inability is rooted more in ignorance than anything else. I do not wish to deny the roots of feelings between the child and the parent or caregiver, but I understand that the child’s lack of ability and ignorance can also be a profound cause of this anxiety and worry. Studies on children from a behavioral sciences perspective show us that the child’s mind is engaged with "ignorance", which significantly impacts them. In fact, coming to terms with Ig-Anxiety is one of the child’s responsibilities.

Ig-Anxiety is not something we possess; rather, it is something we are, rooted within us, as it originates from our ignorance throughout our lives. Ig-Anxiety is not a superficial threat that we can tolerate or set aside. Nor can we classify it as merely one reaction among others. Ig-Anxiety is a persistent threat that targets the foundation and core of our knowledge and awareness, representing an imminent life-threatening experience due to our ignorance.

Søren Kierkegaard states that anyone who observes the contemporary generation will undoubtedly acknowledge that the existing inconsistencies within this generation and the reasons for their anxiety and restlessness stem from the overwhelming abundance of truths and, to some extent, their abstract clarity, all while certainty and conviction are continuously diminished. The multitude of truths indeed reflects our vast ignorance of the boundless universe, and our uncertainty and lack of conviction regarding reaching these infinite truths continually deepen our Ig-Anxiety. Our worries about our ignorance and how we cope with the anxiety it causes are not simple phenomena; they are rooted in our past and our way of living. Human beings suffer from Ig-Anxiety, but this fundamental anxiety is somewhat neutralized and made bearable through psychological defense mechanisms.

Defense Mechanisms of the Mind:

The core of psychotherapy is not theories about the mind but rather the objective and tangible problems that are "evident" and "unaccepted." In this regard, psychotherapy is akin to the science of logic, where one must first understand the premises and truths before placing these concepts into logical statements and arriving at logical conclusions. In this theory, the roots of anxiety often lie in a lack of knowledge or the rejection of an evident truth that has been overlooked. To free oneself from this ignorance-induced anxiety, an individual feels compelled to distort reality and change circumstances and truths, resorting to psychological defense mechanisms.

A defense mechanism is an unconscious reaction of the self (the ego) as part of the personality, aimed at reducing anxiety through a change in the perception of reality. Defense mechanisms are strategies that individuals unconsciously employ in response to anxiety-provoking events to protect themselves from psychological harm. They also help protect one's self-image from shame and guilt in the eyes of others, fostering self-confidence, self-esteem, and preserving one's reputation.

Defense mechanisms can be divided into two categories:

• 1.    Adaptive Defense Mechanisms: These are those that foster adaptation and promote mental health in the individual.

• 2.    Maladaptive Defense Mechanisms: These are mechanisms that, in the long run, lead to mild psychological disorders. Continuous and prolonged use of these can sometimes result in severe mental disorders or psychosis.

When defenses fail, we become overwhelmed by crushing anxiety. We may feel sad, worthless, and depressed. Unless defenses are reestablished or new defenses are formed to replace them, we are likely to experience symptoms of psychological distress or psychosis. Defenses are essential for our mental health. By learning life skills and understanding ourselves and our psyche, more typical and normal defense mechanisms come into play, resulting in less self-deception and more normal behavior.

What shapes the nature and form of defense mechanisms are heredity and genetics, childhood experiences, the level of early attachment to parents, observing others’ behavior and its consequences, personality traits (such as selfishness or depression), familial and societal prohibitions or patterns (for example, individuals quickly learn what to do to gain approval, like resorting to reaction formation), as well as an individual's religion, ideology, and intelligence. For instance, among the religious, the defense mechanism of rationalization (in psychoanalytic terms) or excuse-making is often much stronger.

When we suffer a blow but cannot comprehend the situation or have no explanation for it, we cannot find a correct theory or argument for the existing matter. It is at this moment that we become bewildered, and our defense mechanisms kick in. We may turn to an informed mentor for answers, delve into the realm of metaphysics, or employ other mechanisms. Patients frequently and often utilize several intertwined defense mechanisms to mitigate their anxiety. Ig-Anxiety may not manifest overtly in the patient but instead appear as a transformed anxiety, similar to what Freud described regarding castration anxiety or the Oedipus complex.

In the Truthism Approach:

In the truthism approach, the foundation is the understanding and acceptance of truths and realities. When an individual turns away from these truths and distances themselves from them, they become anxious and use defense mechanisms to cope with this anxiety.

According to the initial and traditional definition of psychological defense mechanisms (which states that a defense mechanism is an unconscious reaction of the self [the ego] as part of the personality aimed at reducing anxiety through changes in the perception of reality), we can conclude that the psychological defense mechanism is, in fact, a distortion of reality that an individual engages in to escape anxiety. In the truthism approach, the root of human anxiety is "ignorance", and the individual's defense mechanism for alleviating their anxiety and distress involves distorting evident truths and realities surrounding the "self," which is done "unconsciously" by concealing and covering up their own ignorance.

In this approach, the psychological defense mechanism is defined as follows:

It is the unconscious reaction of an individual to reduce anxiety and distress by distorting truths and evident realities and covering up their own ignorance. This is a response that individuals engage in when faced with anxiety-provoking events, and since the root of anxiety is ignorance, this response essentially involves hiding and justifying the individual's ignorance. An examination of most contemporary defense mechanisms reveals that they primarily serve as a cover for justifying human ignorance. Individuals perform all these distortions, justifications, actions, and behaviors to conceal their ignorance.

We must recognize that strong defense mechanisms that neutralize severe anxiety hinder our development and the maturation of effective anxiety management. This means that our ability to tolerate a certain level of anxiety is diminished, leading to a constrained and unsatisfactory life. We must accept that we are ignorant, and our ignorance is the root of anxiety, with complete alleviation of ignorance being impossible, as anxiety is a part of our lives. Ignorance-induced anxiety begins at a very young age, and defense mechanisms confront it. The first response and mechanism is "inattention" or "seeking an informed mentor".

Defense Mechanisms in the Truthism Approach: Informed Mentor Defense Mechanism.

Often, behind the consultation that an anxious individual has with an informed mentor, or the connection they establish with a knowledgeable source to address their ignorance, lies a hidden motive: they wish to transfer the responsibility for their decisions to the advisor, mentor, or knowledgeable source. Sometimes, individuals seek out God and the sacred to avoid accepting their responsibilities, surrendering themselves to a state of sacred intoxication. By placing God in the role of an informed mentor, they not only alleviate many of their uncertainties regarding the causes of life events, the correct way of living, awareness of the future, or even life after death, but they also hold God responsible for all events in their lives, including their own decisions. Through the knowledge gained from their informed mentor and God, they find answers to many of their fundamental questions, effectively relieving their anxiety.

At times, anxious individuals turn to political or group leaders, or they may adopt a specific school of thought or philosophy, using these beliefs to soothe their ignorance and reduce their anxiety. The primary reason humans turn to God is to alleviate the fundamental anxiety stemming from ignorance. The function of the psychological defense mechanism of the informed mentor is a major reason for human religiosity. In this psychological mechanism, the individual chooses to follow probabilities rather than face the truth and accept evident realities, thus adhering to the laws of causality.

Defense Mechanism of Illusion of Knowledge. Due to humanity's capacity for thought and the abilities that arise from reasoning, deduction, and abstract thinking, individuals can achieve many of their desires and dominate various aspects of life. This biological capability, along with religious teachings (which form the psychological foundation of humanity and regard individuals as the most esteemed of creations, favored by God), leads to a mental fallacy: the belief that one is exceptional compared to other beings.

Continuing down this path of thought and psychology can lead individuals to believe they possess knowledge and capability for every task. This belief progresses to the extent that a person

not only views themselves as different from other creatures but also considers themselves distinct from those around them, leading to "illusion of knowledge".

Human ignorance is abundant, and the illusion of knowing is a normal functioning of the mind and psyche. This normal function serves as a mechanism for psychological defense. In this mechanism, when faced with any topic, challenge, or issue that may induce anxiety, individuals instinctively assume they have knowledge and awareness of that matter. Humans intuitively understand that knowledge and truths can liberate them, and they also recognize the evident reality that ignorance and unawareness are perpetually challenging and anxiety-inducing. Thus, to avoid or reduce anxiety, they presume their knowledge in confronting every issue, challenge, and topic, using the "defense mechanism of illusion of knowledge" to alleviate the fundamental anxiety stemming from ignorance. They know that knowledge brings them peace, while ignorance brings anxiety, so they convince themselves they are knowledgeable to avoid facing anxiety.

They fail to see new truths and realities that confront them, stubbornly clinging to their prior beliefs, convinced that they possess knowledge in those instances. They are caught in "illusion of knowledge," avoiding cognitive and behavioral dialectics and failing to accept truths and obvious realities, which helps them alleviate the anxiety of ignorance. Every new topic, event, and challenge is intertwined with ignorance and can cause anxiety. Thus, by maintaining this illusion, they prevent anxiety from arising before it manifests. If they were to behave rationally when encountering any issue or topic and accept the reality that they do not possess knowledge in every matter, this ignorance would induce anxiety about their lack of understanding. The consequence of believing in and amplifying the "illusion of knowledge" mechanism results in stagnation, unfulfilled potential, and ultimately losing one's entire life.

Defense Mechanism of Inattention. In this mechanism, an individual is oblivious to the truths and realities surrounding them. When confronted with a new truth or one that contradicts their beliefs, they choose to ignore it. They remain imprisoned by their thoughts and beliefs, unwilling to break free from their comfortable ideological confines to face new truths. Each new truth forces them to confront their ignorance, and the realization of their ignorance, or facing a new and ambiguous reality, is anxiety-inducing. For example, a person may deny their serious illness due to the ambiguity or ignorance of its consequences, thereby ignoring it. Thus, the simplest way to cope with the anxiety of ignorance is through negligence, utilizing the "defense mechanism of inattention".

It is important to note that the difference between this mechanism and the illusion of knowledge is that individuals using the inattention mechanism do not suffer from the delusion of knowledge or the belief that they know. We often observe that when discussing the future and upcoming events, or when ideology or politics are mentioned, some individuals respond with a smile and a sense of victory, saying, "I don't think about these issues at all; they are not important to me, and I see the world differently." They may claim that these matters are insignificant or question why they should think about politics or religion, insisting that "whatever will happen will happen" or declaring, "I live in the moment." Even when they are clearly aware of a cognitive or behavioral mistake, they still choose to ignore it to avoid facing their ignorance and the anxiety it may cause. Such statements and behaviors are often expressed by individuals utilizing the "defense mechanism of inattention".

Defense Mechanism of Rationalization. In this mechanism, an individual offers reasons and excuses for not accepting any clear truth or fact. They do this to avoid admitting their ignorance and thus not experience the anxiety associated with it. They are often intolerant individuals who resort to reasoning and justifications to alleviate their anxiety. By making excuses and providing reasons, they attempt to protect themselves by suggesting that they are more knowledgeable than they truly are and, consequently, more capable, with less ignorance and incapacity. The acceptance of their ignorance and limitations would induce anxiety.

It is worth mentioning that disabilities stem from ignorance, and making excuses for those disabilities is also a means to alleviate the anxiety of ignorance. For example, when an individual attributes their failure in a business transaction to trusting the other party rather than to their ignorance of market laws and customs, or when they justify their accident with excuses without acknowledging their own shortcomings, they are indeed employing the defense mechanism of rationalization.