Two sides of the same coin

Most people think in categories of "true" or "false". Their worldviews consist of statements with the value "true" attached to them. Therefore it is essential how they determine if something is true.

Here I can see a clear division in our society. There are people who very easily believe something to be true. There are also people who are very difficult to convince about something.

Both types think the other type is stupid. But I see them as two sides of the same coin.

The first type easily believes in various things without digging deeper.
The second type easily rejects various things without digging deeper.

There are a lot of first type people in spiritual communities, in esoterics, natural medicine, conspiracy theories, religion, etc. They usually don't need any proof to accept something to be true. They don't put much value on reasoning. Some condemn the undermining of faith. Some are proud of using only the right hemisphere, claiming the left hemisphere is programmed, limited or evil. Sometimes they believe that emotions are the voice of the soul and logical thinking is just "Matrix".

People from the second type like to call themselves "the rational thinking ones", but I don't see anything rational about rejecting information just because it doesn't support one's belief system. They usually believe in science. They are atheists. They believe that only physical matter is real, that there is nothing after death etc. Sometimes it takes extreme forms, like "We cannot talk about spirituality, until we prove the existence of the soul.", or "We cannot talk about aliens until we prove their existence.". They want irrefutable proof.

Is there such a thing as irrefutable proof? What is the definition of proof?
Proof will always be subjective because proof is something that convinces someone that something is true. What one person may consider as evidence, the other person may find insufficient. There will always be someone who denies reality no matter what.

For me, it's like a discussion on which wing of the plane is more important. One side claims that the left wing is crucial and the right one is not important. The other side says the opposite, that the right one is the right one and the left one is wrong.
But the plane needs two wings to fly. It won't fly with just one wing. So, it's not about which hemisphere is more important. It's not religion versus science. It's not faith vs proof.
For me, it's about rising above simple patterns. It's about putting more effort into investigating what is true and questioning the methods we use.
Very few people do that. The problem with the two sides of the same coin is that they both don't really investigate with an open mind. They unconsciously follow their patterns and they don't question them.

I use my left hemisphere a bit more than I use the right one. But I think it is good to have some balance. I use my intuition to have new creative ideas and I use logic to check if those ideas make any sense. Using only one of them is not enough.
Very few people see the need to have some balance between logic and intuition. That's another reason why it's difficult for me to connect with people. I was attacked in spiritual groups for thinking too much, and I wasn't understood when I studied physics because I'm too intuitive.

Obviously, all of that makes any cooperation between those two sides impossible. In my opinion, this is a very elegant and symmetrical mechanism. It would be difficult to mislead people who use logic. But it was easy to make them completely deny some aspects of reality. It would be difficult to make more intuitive people give up spirituality. But it is easy to misdirect them.

I know I used a lot of generalization here. Sometimes it's difficult to share some abstract concepts without any inaccuracies.