FFF#14-THE ARCHAIC QUEST FOR AUTHORIZATION & THE BREAKDOWN OF THE BICAMERAL MIND INTO THE INDIVIDUATED/INTEGRATED SELF-AUTHORIZED MIND
ABANDONED TO OUR OWN AUTHORIZATION
SPLIT BRAIN WITH ONE HALF ATHEIST AND ONE HALF THEIST Wim VDB, June 3, 2010. 2:21
Neurologist VS Ramachandran explains the case of split-brain patients with one hemisphere without a belief in a god, and the other with a belief in a god. (Clip taken from talk at 2006 Beyond Belief Conference, link below)
JOIN US TO DISCUSS JULIAN JAYNES’ BICAMERAL MIND THEORY AS A KEY TO UNDERSTANDING & GETTING FREE OF OBEDIENCE TO AUTHORITY
FREE FRIENDS FORUM -- ABANDONED TO OURSELVES
An Open Forum for Naturalists, Humanists, and Individualists and their Opposites for Argument’s Sake
https://responsiblyfree.substack.com/p/free-friends-abandoned-to-ourselves
--Zoom Saturdays 9PM New Zealand time (for example, this will be Saturdays Australia 7-6PM; China 4PM; Thailand 3PM; Kenya 11AM; Nigeria/France/Spain/Germany 9AM)
--Zoom Sundays 9AM New Zealand time (for example, this will be Saturdays California 12noon; Florida 3PM; Chile 5pm; Nigeria/France/Spain/Germany 9PM)
Personal World Clock tinyurl.com/bdef97z7
USE THE BELOW FOR EVERY MEETING
Jack Carney is inviting you to a scheduled Zoom meeting.
Join Zoom Meeting
https://us06web.zoom.us/j/8245320024
Meeting ID: 824 532 0024
Passcode: 772388
THE ORIGIN OF CONSCIOUSNESS IN THE BREAKDOWN OF THE BICAMERAL MIND. Free download of 2000 Edition
THE BREAKDOWN OF CONSCIOUSNESS AND THE RISE OF SELF AWARENESS: BICAMERAL MENTALITY Artificially Aware, June 10, 2024. 10:25
Join us as we delve into the fascinating and controversial world of bicameral mentality, a hypothesis introduced by Julian Jaynes. In his groundbreaking book, "The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind," Jaynes argued that ancient humans operated with a divided mind, hearing voices they attributed to gods. This video explores the mechanics of the bicameral mind, the evidence supporting this theory, and its transition to modern consciousness. We’ll discuss the impact on ancient civilizations, the parallels with schizophrenia, and the ongoing debate in the scientific community. Discover how this radical idea has influenced popular culture and spurred new research into the origins of self-awareness.”
THE BICAMERAL MIND EXPLAINED! Nexus Void, Jan 23, 2019. 17:08
In this video, I explain the theory of the bicameral mind first proposed by the psychologist Julian Jaynes in which he explains how consciousness may have originated from hallucinations of dead kings who later became gods. Based on The Origins of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind
OVERVIEW OF JULIAN JAYNES’S THEORY OF CONSCIOUSNESS AND THE BICAMERAL MIND
https://www.julianjaynes.org/about/about-jaynes-theory/overview/
BOOK THREE: VESTIGES OF THE BICAMERAL MIND IN THE MODERN WORLD
CH. 1. 3.1 THE QUEST FOR AUTHORIZATION
https://www.julianjaynes.org/book/ooc/en/the-quest-for-authorization/
CH. 4. 3.4 HYPNOSIS
https://www.julianjaynes.org/book/ooc/en/hypnosis/
CH. 6. 3.6 THE AUGURIES OF SCIENCE
https://www.julianjaynes.org/book/ooc/en/the-auguries-of-science/
“THEY WERE NOBLE AUTOMATONS WHO KNEW NOT WHAT THEY DID:” VOLITION IN JAYNES' THE ORIGIN OF CONSCIOUSNESS IN THE BREAKDOWN OF THE BICAMERAL MIND by James W. Moore, 2021
“Jaynes' theory is generally thought of as one that deals with the origins of consciousness more broadly. However, on closer inspection it is clear that it also has much to say about the origins of human volition. In fact, it could be argued that it is as much a theory of volition as it is of consciousness. One reason for this is that, for Jaynes, self-volition is a defining characteristic of consciousness.”
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8720781/
JULIAN JAYNES EXTRAS
NEUROSCIENCE CONFIRMS JULIAN JAYNES’S NEUROLOGICAL MODEL Julian Jaynes Society, Updated March 18, 2024
“Over three decades ago, Julian Jaynes introduced his theory of the origin of consciousness and a historically older mentality called the bicameral mind …
While the technology was not then available to test his ideas, Jaynes suggested a possible neurological model for the bicameral mind. Briefly stated, he reasoned that auditory hallucinations emanate from the areas of the right temporal lobe corresponding to the language areas in the left temporal lobe, and are subsequently processed (or “heard”) in the left temporal lobe language areas. Because of their external quality, the bicameral person experiencing auditory hallucinations interpreted them as the externally generated commands of a dead ancestor, chief, king, or god. To this day, those who experience auditory hallucinations often hear behavioral commands and experience them as being externally generated.
In my chapter in Reflections on the Dawn of Consciousness, “Consciousness, Hallucinations, and the Bicameral Mind: Three Decades of New Research,” I discuss a number of neuroimaging studies that emerged over the past decade that provide support for Jaynes’s neurological model. These studies show brain activation in the right followed by the left temporal lobe at the onset of auditory hallucinations. Some researchers infer a possible interaction between these two areas — the language areas of the left hemisphere and the corresponding areas of the right hemisphere — during auditory hallucinations.
Since the publication of Reflections on the Dawn of Consciousness, a number of new studies have been published that also show bilateral temporal lobe (‘bicameral’) activation during auditory hallucinations, providing further support for Jaynes’s neurological model specifically and his bicameral mind theory in general.
https://www.julianjaynes.org/blog/featured/neuroscience-confirms-julian-jaynes-neurological-model/
SUMMARY OF EVIDENCE FOR THE BICAMERAL MIND THEORY Julian Jaynes Society, Updated March 2022 and 2023
https://www.julianjaynes.org/about/about-jaynes-theory/summary-of-evidence/
CRITIQUES & RESPONSES PART 1 Julian Jaynes Society
https://www.julianjaynes.org/about/about-jaynes-theory/critiques-and-responses-part-1/
CRITIQUES & RESPONSES PART 2
https://www.julianjaynes.org/about/about-jaynes-theory/critiques-and-responses-part-2/
CRITIQUES & RESPONSES PART 3
https://www.julianjaynes.org/about/about-jaynes-theory/critiques-and-responses-part-3/
CRITIQUE OF IAIN MCGILCHRIST ON JULIAN JAYNES SOCIETY WEBSITE
2.7. Confusion Regarding Schizophrenia as a Vestige of the Bicameral Mind (Iain McGilchrist)
Critique: “The problem with [Jaynes’s view that schizophrenia is a vestige of the bicameral mind] is that all the evidence suggests that schizophrenia is a relatively modern disease, quite possibly existent only since the eighteenth century or thereabouts, and that its principal psychopathological features have nothing to do with regression towards irrationality, lack of self-awareness, and a retreat into the infantile realm of emotion and the body, but entail the exact opposites: a sort of misplaced hyper-rationalism, a hyper-reflexive self-awareness, and a disengagement from emotion and embodied existence.” − Iain McGilchrist, psychiatrist, in The Master and His Emissary: The Divided Brain and the Making of the Modern Western World, p. 261.
Response: The original subtitle of McGilchrist’s book was “The Divided Brain and the Making of the Modern World.” This likely received immediate push-back (many current cultures don’t fit McGilchrist’s mold), so it was quickly changed to “The Divided Brain and the Making of the Western World.” Yet trying to connect even so-called “Western” cultural changes to alleged changes in brain hemisphere dominance is likely unsupported by evidence — but more on that later.
First, McGilchrist states that schizophrenia is a “recent disease.” While the label of schizophrenia is certainly recent, the primary symptom of psychosis — auditory hallucinations — is now well documented throughout history among both literate and pre-literate societies. Jaynes’s main point is that the auditory hallucinations that are still frequent today have their roots in bicameral mentality.
Next, McGilchrist overplays symptoms that are sometimes associated with schizophrenia while underplaying the primary symptom of auditory hallucinations in a weak effort to discredit Jaynes’s theory. Again, Jaynes’s main point is that people given the label of schizophrenia often hear voices, and these voices have a previously overlooked historical context.
SOCIAL BY MATTHEW D. LIEBERMAN
(Free Summary) Books in Blinks, Feb 28, 2023. 17:43
Social (2013) is a whistlestop tour led by noted psychologist Matthew Lieberman through the latest neuroscientific research into our social lives. Foregrounding the deeply human need for connection, these blinks examine how evolution has molded the ways in which we navigate complex social situations. Packed full of original research conducted in the Lieberman’s UCLA lab, Social shows that getting along with others is a primary driver in all our lives.
➤ Key ideas in this title: ⏭ 00:00 Introduction to Social by Matthew D. Lieberman ⏭ 01:04 Our brains have a built-in passion for thinking socially. ⏭ 03:14 Human brains naturally encourage social connection, which is why social pain hurts so much. ⏭ 05:44 The ability to understand the thoughts and feelings of others allows our social endeavors to thrive. ⏭ 08:12 Our sense of self allows us to connect and adapt to social groups. ⏭ 10:39 Our capacity for self-control serves more than just ourselves – it’s also valuable for social cohesion. ⏭ 13:16 Social factors can increase our well-being in daily life and productivity in the workplace. ⏭ 16:00 Final summary of Social by Matthew D. Lieberman
SOCIAL: WHY OUR BRAINS ARE WIRED TO CONNECT by Matthew D. Lieberman p.235-238 (digital)
“WHAT WE FAIL TO APPRECIATE, HOWEVER, IS THE DEGREE TO WHICH SOCIETY HAS SHAPED THE CONTENTS OF OUR MINDS—the way we form our goals and beliefs, and what causes us to exert our self-control in different situations. From infancy, we are surrounded by a social world that is more than happy to tell us what good people want and do, to tell us which of these desirable characteristics we have, and what kind of life is worth leading. However, ALL OF THIS INPUT FROM THE OUTSIDE WORLD WOULD AMOUNT TO NOTHING IF WE WEREN’T BORN WITH A TROJAN HORSE SELF THAT IS BUILT TO SOAK ALL OF THIS UP LIKE A SPONGE, WITHOUT US REALIZING WHERE THESE FOUNDATIONAL WORLDVIEWS CAME FROM. We believe these are our deeply personal private stock of beliefs, and that notion makes us work hard to defend them. It rarely dawns on us that others put them there. WHEN WE DEFEND OUR BELIEFS, WE ARE USUALLY DEFENDING SOCIETY’S BELIEFS. This alignment between our private beliefs and the beliefs of those around us motivates us to be useful members of society. It helps to ensure that others will like us, and it increases the ratio of social pleasure to pain we will encounter in our lives.
“These are very counterintuitive notions. THE IDEA THAT OUR PERSONAL VALUES WERE SNUCK INTO US BY SOCIETY AT LARGE AND THAT OUR SELF-CONTROL EXISTS IN PART TO RESTRAIN, RATHER THAN SUPPORT, THE SELF IS ANATHEMA TO OUR WAY OF THINKING ABOUT “WHO WE ARE.” Yet brain science is helping us to see the fundamental truth behind these claims—that our most deeply personal sense of self and sources of willpower may most often serve to keep us in the good graces of the group. Harmonizing is hard work, but apparently evolution thought it was “worth it” to make our attitudes and beliefs aligned with those of the group rather than at odds with them.
“The coup de grâce of evolution’s molding of a social brain is the twin stars of self-knowledge and self-control. OUR SENSE OF SELF, AS REPRESENTED IN THE MEDIAL PREFRONTAL CORTEX, IS LARGELY A DECEIT. WHAT IT CONTAINS WE BELIEVE TO BE PRIVATE AND INACCESSIBLE, YET IN REALITY IT IS A CONDUIT FOR THE SOCIALIZATION OF OUR BELIEFS AND VALUES. Self-control, as mediated by the ventrolateral prefrontal cortex, also serves a purpose different from the one we first imagine. RATHER THAN PUSHING OUR OWN PERSONAL DESTINY FORWARD, SELF-CONTROL OFTEN SERVES AS AN INSTRUMENT OF SOCIAL CONTROL ENSURING THAT WE FOLLOW SOCIAL NORMS AND VALUES. IN A SENSE, NEITHER THE SELF NOR SELF-CONTROL END UP SERVING US IN THE WAY WE IMAGINE THEY SHOULD. They do, however, serve to ensure social harmonizing. They make us more likeable and agreeable to others in the groups we spend our time with. THEY MAKE US STRIVE TO SUPPORT THE GROUP, SOMETIMES AT THE EXPENSE OF OUR PRIVATE UNSOCIALIZED IMPULSES, AND THIS EFFORT MAKES US MORE VALUABLE TO THE GROUP.” [my emphasis]
SOCIAL: WHY OUR BRAINS ARE WIRED TO CONNECT by Matthew D. Lieberman. THE BOOK ON AMAZON
REVIEW
5.0 out of 5 stars We are more EO Wilson's ant than Ayn Rand's architect
Reviewed in the United States on December 17, 2013
This is another strong offering under the general category of evolutionary psychology. However, what makes this book different -- and shocking -- is the conclusion drawn toward the end. We are fundamentally mistaken about "who we are" because our evolved brain regularly tricks us into thinking we are taking certain actions or thinking certain thoughts on behalf of ourselves when, really, these actions & thoughts are on behalf of our social group. For some reason I was reminded of the '70's move, Soylent Green, where at the climax Charlton Heston raises a bloodied hand and shouts: "Soylent Green is People!" Well, Matthew Lieberman, as an academic, understandably shies away from using bloody hands, agonized cries, or even exclamation points, but you could easily imagine the unstated climax of his book as being: "The Self is People!"
Now that we have this fundamentally new understanding of the Self, how do we live with it? Lieberman address this but, to me, it feels more like a piece of candy and a pat on the back after a visit to the doctor. What might be a better follow up is a book that would be something similar to The Robot's Rebellion, Stanovich's take on the implications of The Selfish Gene....or maybe even something like Camus' Myth of Sisyphus, but rooted in this brave new world of the "Self."
https://www.amazon.com/Social-Matthew-D-Lieberman-audiobook/dp/B00GDKVV4K/ref=sr_1_1