The Great Modern Schism

Classical: Understanding of the world achieved through reason and logic. The focus of this way of thinking is understanding what things mean or, in other words, understanding their underlying form. This way of thinking requires the analytical knife.
Romantic: The understanding of what a thing is. It is often associated with the creative and imaginative qualities of the human being, but it can also come across as rather shallow. This way of thinking rejects the analytical knife.
There have been several mornings when I would put on this striped sweater and decided to take it off. The sweater is perfectly functional. It was perfect for those cold weekday mornings. It has long sleeves. It's warm. I just decided not to wear it. It just didn't fit the look I was looking for.
Last week, I went to Safeway and I really wanted peanut butter. I had a choice between the brand name peanut butter and the Safeway brand peanut butter. I went with the Safeway brand. What? It's the same thing, except it's cheaper. That's the logical choice.
I think these two anecdotes capture the walking contradiction that I am. In the first example, my decision was eventually decided by what the shirt was and not what it meant. I did not make the logical choice. I did not choose function over form. In the second example, I chose the peanut butter solely for logical purposes. I chose the Safeway brand for its function and paid no attention to it's form. I don't care if someone catches me buying Safeway brand peanut butter. Romantic and classical. Isn't that weird? It just seems like there are certain situations that lend themselves better to the classical perspective and others that lend themselves better to the romantic perspective.
But there is the problem? When is the one better and when is the other better? To be honest, on those days when I was debating whether or not to wear the shirt, it took me a long time to finally decide. In reflection, I guess it wasn't really a decision between whether or not to wear the shirt, but whether to use classical or romantic understanding to make the decision. Not only can competition between the two ways of understanding split people into factions but it can also split individuals in two (figuratively speaking of course).
I guess that's why I agree with the narrator's view. The split between classical and romantic has split me in two. They simply cannot work together on all issues. Sure, if the brand name peanut butter was cheaper, they would be working together. Or, if the sweater was not so 90s, they would work together. But, there are many circumstances when choices have both good form and good function. The two understandings just have two different priorities.