Bicameral mentality: Difference between revisions
→The Origin of Consciousness: restoring material from old revision date 2 July 2023 |
|||
Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
==''The Origin of Consciousness''== |
==''The Origin of Consciousness''== |
||
{{Main|The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind}} |
{{Main|The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind}} |
||
{{More citations needed section|date=September 2023}} |
|||
[[Julian Jaynes]] proposed the theory of the bicameral mind, suggesting that early human consciousness operated differently from our modern experience. He used the term "bicameral" metaphorically to describe a mental state in which the [[Lateralization of brain function|right hemisphere]]'s experiences were transmitted to the left hemisphere through [[Auditory hallucination|auditory hallucinations]]. This concept was based on the lateralization of brain function, although not implying physical separation. |
|||
Jaynes uses "bicameral" (two chambers) to describe a mental state in which the experiences and memories of the right hemisphere of the brain are transmitted to the left hemisphere via auditory hallucinations. The metaphor is based on the idea of [[lateralization of brain function]] although each half of a normal human brain is constantly communicating with the other through the ''[[corpus callosum]]''. The metaphor is not meant to imply that the two halves of the bicameral brain were "cut off" from each other but that the bicameral mind was experienced as a different, non-conscious mental schema wherein volition in the face of novel stimuli was mediated through a linguistic control mechanism and experienced as auditory verbal hallucination. |
|||
In this theorized state, individuals lacked self-awareness and introspection. Instead of conscious thought, they heard external voices or "gods" guiding their actions and decisions. This form of consciousness, devoid of metaconsciousness and [[autobiographical memory]], persisted until about 3,000 years ago when societal changes led to the emergence of our current conscious mode of thought. |
|||
===Definition=== |
|||
Jaynes argued that individuals in the bicameral state resembled people with [[schizophrenia]]. Auditory hallucinations experienced by those with schizophrenia, including [[command hallucinations]], paralleled the external guidance experienced by bicameral individuals. He suggested that schizophrenia might be a vestige of this earlier consciousness. |
|||
Bicameral mentality is non-conscious in its inability to reason and articulate about mental contents through meta-reflection, reacting without explicitly realizing and without the meta-reflective ability to give an account of ''why'' one did so. The bicameral mind thus lacks metaconsciousness, autobiographical memory, and the capacity for executive "ego functions" such as deliberate mind-wandering and conscious introspection of mental content. When bicameral mentality as a method of social control was no longer adaptive in complex civilizations, this mental model was replaced by the conscious mode of thought which, Jaynes argued, is grounded in the acquisition of metaphorical [[language]] learned by exposure to narrative practice. |
|||
According to Jaynes, ancient people in the bicameral state of mind experienced the world in a manner that has some similarities to that of a [[schizophrenia|person with schizophrenia]]. Rather than making conscious evaluations in novel or unexpected situations, the person hallucinated a voice or "god" giving admonitory advice or commands and obey without question: One was not at all conscious of one's own thought processes ''per se''. Jaynes's hypothesis is offered as a possible explanation of "''command hallucinations''" that often direct the behavior of those with first rank symptoms of schizophrenia, as well as other voice hearers.<ref>{{cite journal | last=Erkwoh, R. | title=Command Hallucinations: Who Obeys and Who Resists When? | journal=Psychopathology | year= 2002 | volume = 35 | issue=5 |doi=10.1159/000067065 | pages=272–279| pmid=12457018 | s2cid=6768239 }}</ref> |
|||
===Jaynes's evidence=== |
|||
To support his theory, Jaynes drew evidence from sources such as historical literature, myths, and [[anthropology]]. He highlighted instances in ancient texts like the [[Iliad]] and the [[Old Testament]] where there was no evidence of introspection or self-awareness. He also noted that gods in ancient societies were numerous and anthropomorphic, reflecting the personal nature of the external voices guiding individuals. |
|||
Jaynes built a case for this hypothesis that human brains existed in a bicameral state until as recently as 3,000 years ago by citing evidence from many diverse sources including historical literature. He took an [[interdisciplinary]] approach, drawing data from many different fields.<ref name="EvidenceSummary">{{cite web | year=1998–2006 | last=Kuijsten | first=Marcel | url=http://www.julianjaynes.org/evidence_summary.php | title=Summary of Evidence | access-date=2006-05-22}}</ref> Jaynes asserted that, until roughly the times written about in [[Homer]]'s ''[[Iliad]]'', humans did not generally have the self-awareness characteristic of [[consciousness]] as most people experience it today. Rather, the bicameral individual was guided by mental commands believed to be issued by external "[[Deity|gods]]"—commands which were recorded in ancient [[Mythology|myths]], legends and historical accounts. This is exemplified not only in the commands given to characters in ancient epics but also the very [[muse]]s of [[Greek mythology]] which "sang" the poems. According to Jaynes, the ancients literally heard muses as the direct source of their [[music]] and [[poetry]]. |
|||
Jaynes asserts that in the ''Iliad'' and sections of the [[Old Testament]] no mention is made of any kind of [[cognition|cognitive]] processes such as [[introspection]], and there is no apparent indication that the writers were self-aware. Jaynes suggests, the older portions of the Old Testament (such as the [[Book of Amos]]) have few or none of the features of some later books of the Old Testament (such as [[Ecclesiastes]]) as well as later works such as Homer's ''[[Odyssey]]'', which show indications of a profoundly different kind of mentality—an early form of consciousness.<ref name="EvidenceSummary" /> |
|||
The transition from bicameral to conscious mentality occurred during periods of instability and change. Jaynes argued that the breakdown of the bicameral mind was marked by societal collapses and environmental challenges. As people lost contact with external voices, practices like [[divination]] and [[Oracle|oracles]] emerged as attempts to reconnect with the guidance they once received. |
|||
In ancient times, Jaynes noted, gods were generally much more numerous and much more [[anthropomorphic]] than in modern times, and speculates that this was because each bicameral person had their own "god" who reflected their own desires and experiences.<ref>{{cite journal | last=Stove | first=D.C. |date=April 1989 | title=The Oracles & Their Cessation | journal=Encounter | volume=72 | issue=4 | pages=30–38 | issn=0013-7073}}</ref> |
|||
Jaynes believed that remnants of the bicameral mind persist in mental illnesses like schizophrenia. He asserted that the lack of evidence for insanity in ancient texts before the transition period supported his theory. However, his theory remains controversial in scientific circles, with discussions ongoing regarding its validity and the extent to which ancient consciousness truly differed from our modern experience.{{sfnp|Jaynes|1976|pp=404–405}} |
|||
He also noted that in ancient societies the corpses of the dead were often treated as though still alive (being seated, dressed, and even fed) as a form of [[ancestor worship]], and Jaynes argued that the dead bodies were presumed to be still living and the source of auditory hallucinations.<ref name="EvidenceSummary" /> This adaptation to the village communities of 100 individuals or more formed the core of religion. |
|||
Jaynes inferred that these "voices" came from the [[right brain]] counterparts of the [[left brain]] language centres; specifically, the counterparts to [[Wernicke's area]] and [[Broca's area]]. These regions are somewhat dormant in the right brains of most modern humans, but Jaynes noted that some studies show that auditory hallucinations correspond to increased activity in these areas of the brain.<ref name="EvidenceSummary" /> |
|||
Jaynes notes that even at the time of publication there is no consensus as to the cause or origins of [[schizophrenia]]. Jaynes argues that schizophrenia is a vestige of humanity's earlier bicameral state.<ref name="EvidenceSummary" /> Recent evidence shows that many people with schizophrenia do not just hear random voices but experience "[[Hallucination#Command|command hallucinations]]" instructing their behavior or urging them to commit certain acts, such as walking into the ocean, which the listener feels they have no choice but to follow. Jaynes also argues people with schizophrenia feel a loss of identity due to hallucinated voices taking the place of their internal monologue.{{Full citation needed|date=December 2013}} |
|||
As support for Jaynes's argument, these command hallucinations are little different from the commands from gods which feature prominently in ancient stories.<ref name="EvidenceSummary" /> Indirect evidence supporting Jaynes's theory that hallucinations once played an important role in human mentality can be found in the 2012 book ''Muses, Madmen, and Prophets: Rethinking the History, Science, and Meaning of Auditory Hallucination'' by [[Daniel Smith (writer)|Daniel Smith]].<ref>{{cite book |last=Smith |first=Daniel |title=Muses, Madmen, and Prophets: Rethinking the history, science, and meaning of auditory hallucination |year=2007 |isbn=978-1-86320-110-3 |url-access=registration |url=https://archive.org/details/musesmadmenproph0000smit }}</ref> |
|||
===Breakdown=== |
|||
Jaynes theorized that a shift from bicameral mentality marked the beginning of introspection and consciousness as we know it today. According to Jaynes, this bicameral mentality began malfunctioning or "breaking down" during the 2nd millennium BCE. He speculates that primitive ancient societies tended to collapse periodically: for example, Egypt's [[History of ancient Egypt|Intermediate Periods]], as well as the periodically vanishing cities of the Mayas, as changes in the environment strained the socio-cultural equilibria sustained by this bicameral mindset. |
|||
The [[Bronze age collapse]] of the 2nd millennium BCE led to mass migrations and created a rash of unexpected situations and stresses which required ancient minds to become more flexible and creative. Self-awareness, or consciousness, was the culturally evolved solution to this problem. This necessity of communicating commonly observed phenomena among individuals who shared no common language or cultural upbringing encouraged those communities to become self-aware to survive in a new environment. Thus consciousness, like bicameral mentality, emerged as a neurological adaptation to social complexity in a changing world.{{citation needed|date=August 2016}} |
|||
Jaynes further argues that [[divination]], [[prayer]], and [[oracle]]s arose during this breakdown period, in an attempt to summon instructions from the "gods" whose voices could no longer be heard.<ref name="EvidenceSummary" /> The consultation of special bicamerally operative individuals, or of divination by [[Cleromancy|casting lots]] and so forth, was a response to this loss, a transitional era depicted, for example, in the book of [[Books of Samuel|1 Samuel]]. It was also evidenced in children who could communicate with the gods, but as their neurology was set by language and society they gradually lost that ability. Those who continued prophesying, being bicameral according to Jaynes, could be killed.<ref>{{cite book |last=Jaynes |first=Julian | author-link=Julian Jaynes | title=The origin of consciousness in the breakdown of the bicameral mind | publisher=Houghton Mifflin |orig-year=1976| year=2000 |isbn=0-618-05707-2 |page=221 |url=https://cloudflare-ipfs.com/ipfs/bafykbzacedq3ipihe4hdoq4bjxy7kqfp5ulmlaqwkabss6iuw45ojvjirs3j2?filename=Julian Jaynes - The origin of consciousness in the breakdown of the bicameral mind-Houghton Mifflin (2000).pdf}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Zechariah 13:3-4;&version=31; |title=Zechariah |at=13: 2-3 |website=biblegateway.com}}</ref> |
|||
Leftovers of the bicameral mind today, according to Jaynes, include mental illnesses such as schizophrenia. Jaynes says that there is no evidence of insanity existing prior to the breakdown of the bicameral mind and that this is indirect evidence for his theory. He considered that previous claims of insanity in Homeric literature are based on mistranslations.<ref>{{cite book |title=The origin of consciousness in the breakdown of the bicameral mind |date=1976 |publisher=Houghton Mifflin |pages=404-405}}</ref> |
|||
==Reception== |
==Reception== |
Revision as of 15:54, 17 February 2024
A request that this article title be changed to Bicameralism (psychology) is under discussion. Please do not move this article until the discussion is closed. |
This article may be unbalanced toward certain viewpoints. (May 2020) |
Bicameral mentality is a hypothesis introduced by Julian Jaynes who argued human ancestors as late as the ancient Greeks did not consider emotions and desires as stemming from their own minds but as the consequences of actions of gods external to themselves. The theory posits that the human mind once operated in a state in which cognitive functions were divided between one part of the brain which appears to be "speaking", and a second part which listens and obeys—a bicameral mind, and that the breakdown of this division gave rise to consciousness in humans. The term was coined by Jaynes who presented the idea in his 1976 book The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind,[1] wherein he made the case that a bicameral mentality was the normal and ubiquitous state of the human mind as recently as 3,000 years ago, near the end of the Mediterranean bronze age.
The Origin of Consciousness
Jaynes uses "bicameral" (two chambers) to describe a mental state in which the experiences and memories of the right hemisphere of the brain are transmitted to the left hemisphere via auditory hallucinations. The metaphor is based on the idea of lateralization of brain function although each half of a normal human brain is constantly communicating with the other through the corpus callosum. The metaphor is not meant to imply that the two halves of the bicameral brain were "cut off" from each other but that the bicameral mind was experienced as a different, non-conscious mental schema wherein volition in the face of novel stimuli was mediated through a linguistic control mechanism and experienced as auditory verbal hallucination.
Definition
Bicameral mentality is non-conscious in its inability to reason and articulate about mental contents through meta-reflection, reacting without explicitly realizing and without the meta-reflective ability to give an account of why one did so. The bicameral mind thus lacks metaconsciousness, autobiographical memory, and the capacity for executive "ego functions" such as deliberate mind-wandering and conscious introspection of mental content. When bicameral mentality as a method of social control was no longer adaptive in complex civilizations, this mental model was replaced by the conscious mode of thought which, Jaynes argued, is grounded in the acquisition of metaphorical language learned by exposure to narrative practice.
According to Jaynes, ancient people in the bicameral state of mind experienced the world in a manner that has some similarities to that of a person with schizophrenia. Rather than making conscious evaluations in novel or unexpected situations, the person hallucinated a voice or "god" giving admonitory advice or commands and obey without question: One was not at all conscious of one's own thought processes per se. Jaynes's hypothesis is offered as a possible explanation of "command hallucinations" that often direct the behavior of those with first rank symptoms of schizophrenia, as well as other voice hearers.[2]
Jaynes's evidence
Jaynes built a case for this hypothesis that human brains existed in a bicameral state until as recently as 3,000 years ago by citing evidence from many diverse sources including historical literature. He took an interdisciplinary approach, drawing data from many different fields.[3] Jaynes asserted that, until roughly the times written about in Homer's Iliad, humans did not generally have the self-awareness characteristic of consciousness as most people experience it today. Rather, the bicameral individual was guided by mental commands believed to be issued by external "gods"—commands which were recorded in ancient myths, legends and historical accounts. This is exemplified not only in the commands given to characters in ancient epics but also the very muses of Greek mythology which "sang" the poems. According to Jaynes, the ancients literally heard muses as the direct source of their music and poetry.
Jaynes asserts that in the Iliad and sections of the Old Testament no mention is made of any kind of cognitive processes such as introspection, and there is no apparent indication that the writers were self-aware. Jaynes suggests, the older portions of the Old Testament (such as the Book of Amos) have few or none of the features of some later books of the Old Testament (such as Ecclesiastes) as well as later works such as Homer's Odyssey, which show indications of a profoundly different kind of mentality—an early form of consciousness.[3]
In ancient times, Jaynes noted, gods were generally much more numerous and much more anthropomorphic than in modern times, and speculates that this was because each bicameral person had their own "god" who reflected their own desires and experiences.[4]
He also noted that in ancient societies the corpses of the dead were often treated as though still alive (being seated, dressed, and even fed) as a form of ancestor worship, and Jaynes argued that the dead bodies were presumed to be still living and the source of auditory hallucinations.[3] This adaptation to the village communities of 100 individuals or more formed the core of religion.
Jaynes inferred that these "voices" came from the right brain counterparts of the left brain language centres; specifically, the counterparts to Wernicke's area and Broca's area. These regions are somewhat dormant in the right brains of most modern humans, but Jaynes noted that some studies show that auditory hallucinations correspond to increased activity in these areas of the brain.[3]
Jaynes notes that even at the time of publication there is no consensus as to the cause or origins of schizophrenia. Jaynes argues that schizophrenia is a vestige of humanity's earlier bicameral state.[3] Recent evidence shows that many people with schizophrenia do not just hear random voices but experience "command hallucinations" instructing their behavior or urging them to commit certain acts, such as walking into the ocean, which the listener feels they have no choice but to follow. Jaynes also argues people with schizophrenia feel a loss of identity due to hallucinated voices taking the place of their internal monologue.[full citation needed]
As support for Jaynes's argument, these command hallucinations are little different from the commands from gods which feature prominently in ancient stories.[3] Indirect evidence supporting Jaynes's theory that hallucinations once played an important role in human mentality can be found in the 2012 book Muses, Madmen, and Prophets: Rethinking the History, Science, and Meaning of Auditory Hallucination by Daniel Smith.[5]
Breakdown
Jaynes theorized that a shift from bicameral mentality marked the beginning of introspection and consciousness as we know it today. According to Jaynes, this bicameral mentality began malfunctioning or "breaking down" during the 2nd millennium BCE. He speculates that primitive ancient societies tended to collapse periodically: for example, Egypt's Intermediate Periods, as well as the periodically vanishing cities of the Mayas, as changes in the environment strained the socio-cultural equilibria sustained by this bicameral mindset.
The Bronze age collapse of the 2nd millennium BCE led to mass migrations and created a rash of unexpected situations and stresses which required ancient minds to become more flexible and creative. Self-awareness, or consciousness, was the culturally evolved solution to this problem. This necessity of communicating commonly observed phenomena among individuals who shared no common language or cultural upbringing encouraged those communities to become self-aware to survive in a new environment. Thus consciousness, like bicameral mentality, emerged as a neurological adaptation to social complexity in a changing world.[citation needed]
Jaynes further argues that divination, prayer, and oracles arose during this breakdown period, in an attempt to summon instructions from the "gods" whose voices could no longer be heard.[3] The consultation of special bicamerally operative individuals, or of divination by casting lots and so forth, was a response to this loss, a transitional era depicted, for example, in the book of 1 Samuel. It was also evidenced in children who could communicate with the gods, but as their neurology was set by language and society they gradually lost that ability. Those who continued prophesying, being bicameral according to Jaynes, could be killed.[6][7]
Leftovers of the bicameral mind today, according to Jaynes, include mental illnesses such as schizophrenia. Jaynes says that there is no evidence of insanity existing prior to the breakdown of the bicameral mind and that this is indirect evidence for his theory. He considered that previous claims of insanity in Homeric literature are based on mistranslations.[8]
Reception
Popular reception
Early coverage by Sam Keen in the November 1977 issue of Psychology Today considered Jaynes's hypothesis worthy and offered conditional support, arguing the notion deserves further study.[9][10]
The book was nominated for the National Book Award in Contemporary Thought in 1978.[11] It has been translated into Italian, French, German, Korean, Japanese, Spanish, and Persian.[12]
A new edition, with an afterword that addressed some criticisms and restated the main themes, was published in the United States in 1990 and in the United Kingdom (by Penguin Books) in 1993,[13] re-issued in 2000.[14]
Philip K. Dick, Terrence McKenna, and David Bowie all cited the book as an influence.[15]
Scholarly reactions
According to Jaynes, language is a necessary but not sufficient condition for consciousness: language existed thousands of years earlier, but consciousness could not have emerged without language.[16] The idea that language is a necessary component of subjective consciousness and more abstract forms of thinking has gained the support of proponents including Andy Clark, Daniel Dennett, William H. Calvin, Merlin Donald, John Limber, Howard Margolis, Peter Carruthers, and José Luis Bermúdez.[17]
Gary Williams defends the Jaynesian definition of consciousness as a social–linguistic construct learned in childhood, structured in terms of lexical metaphors and narrative practice,[18] against Ned Block's criticism that it is "ridiculous" to suppose that consciousness is a cultural construction,[19] while the Dutch philosophy professor Jan Sleutels offers an additional critique of Block.[20]
H. Steven Moffic questioned why Jaynes's theory was left out of a discussion on auditory hallucinations by Asaad & Shapiro (1986).[21] The authors' published response was: "... Jaynes' hypothesis makes for interesting reading and stimulates much thought in the receptive reader. It does not adequately explain one of the central mysteries of madness: hallucination."[This quote needs a citation]
The new evidence for Jaynes's model of auditory hallucinations arising in the right temporal-parietal lobe and being transmitted to the left temporal-parietal lobe that some neuroimaging studies suggest was discussed by various respondents.[22][23][24]
Individual scholars' comments
Richard Dawkins in The God Delusion (2006) wrote of The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind: "It is one of those books that is either complete rubbish or a work of consummate genius; Nothing in between! Probably the former, but I'm hedging my bets."[25]
The philosopher Daniel Dennett suggested that Jaynes may have been wrong about some of his supporting arguments – especially the importance he attached to hallucinations – but that these things are not essential to his main thesis:[26] "If we are going to use this top-down approach, we are going to have to be bold. We are going to have to be speculative, but there is good and bad speculation, and this is not an unparalleled activity in science. ... Those scientists who have no taste for this sort of speculative enterprise will just have to stay in the trenches and do without it, while the rest of us risk embarrassing mistakes and have a lot of fun." — Daniel Dennett[27]
Gregory Cochran, a physicist and adjunct professor of anthropology at the University of Utah, wrote: "Genes affecting personality, reproductive strategies, cognition, are all able to change significantly over few-millennia time scales if the environment favors such change—and this includes the new environments we have made for ourselves, things like new ways of making a living and new social structures. ... There is evidence that such change has occurred. ... On first reading, Breakdown seemed one of the craziest books ever written, but Jaynes may have been on to something."[28]
Author and historian of science Morris Berman writes: "[Jaynes's] description of this new consciousness is one of the best I have come across."[29]
Danish science writer Tor Nørretranders discusses and expands on Jaynes's theory in his 1991 book The User Illusion, dedicating an entire chapter to it.[30]
Psychiatrist Iain McGilchrist proposes that Jaynes's hypothesis was the opposite of what happened: "I believe he [Jaynes] got one important aspect of the story back to front. His contention that the phenomena he describes came about because of a breakdown of the 'bicameral mind' – so that the two hemispheres, previously separate, now merged – is the precise inverse of what happened."[31] Kuijsten maintained that McGilchrist mischaracterized Jaynes's theory.[32]
Brian J. McVeigh, a graduate student of Jaynes, maintains that many of the most frequent criticisms of Jaynes's theory are either incorrect or reflect serious misunderstandings of Jaynes's theory, especially Jaynes's more precise definition of consciousness. Jaynes defines consciousness—in the tradition of Locke and Descartes—as "that which is introspectable". Jaynes draws a sharp distinction between consciousness ("introspectable mind-space") and other mental processes such as cognition, learning, sensation, and perception. McVeigh argues that this distinction is frequently not recognized by those offering critiques of Jaynes's theory.[33]
Criticism
An early criticism by philosopher Ned Block argued that Jaynes had confused the emergence of consciousness with the emergence of the concept of consciousness. In other words, according to Block, humans were conscious all along but did not have the concept of consciousness and thus did not discuss it in their texts. Daniel Dennett countered that for some things, such as money, baseball, or consciousness, one cannot have the thing without also having the concept of the thing.[34][20][18]
Sociologist W. T. Jones asked in 1979, "Why, despite its implausibility, is [Jaynes's] book taken seriously by thoughtful and intelligent people?"[35] Jones agreed with Jaynes that "the language in which talk about consciousness is conducted is metaphorical", but he contradicted the basis of Jaynes's argument – that metaphor creates consciousness – by asserting that "language (and specifically metaphor) does not create, it discovers, the similarities that language marks". Jones also argued that three "cosmological orientations" biased Jaynes's thinking: 1) "hostility to Darwin" and natural selection; 2) a "longing for 'lost bicamerality'" (Jones accused Jaynes of holding that "we would all be better off if 'everyone' were once again schizophrenic"); 3) a "desire for a sweeping, all-inclusive formula that explains everything that has happened". Jones concluded that "... those who share these biases ... are likely to find the book convincing; those who do not will reject [Jaynes's] arguments ..."[35]
The neurological model in The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind was a radical neuroscientific hypothesis that was based on research novel at the time, mainly on the Gazzaniga's "split-brain" theory.[36][37] However, the more general idea of a "divided self" (contrasted with a "unitary self") has found support from psychological and neurological studies.[38]
Homeric epic
Walter J. Ong noticed that the Homeric Iliad is a structurally oral epic poem so, he asserted, the very different cultural approach of oral culture is sufficient justification for the apparent different mentalities in the poem.[39]
Julian Jaynes Society
The Julian Jaynes Society was founded by Marcel Kuijsten in 1997, shortly after Jaynes's death. The society has published a number of books on Julian Jaynes's theory including foreign-language editions of Julian Jaynes's theory in French, German, and Spanish. The society also maintains a member area, with articles, lectures, and interviews on Jaynes's theory.[citation needed]
Similar ideas
This section possibly contains original research. (February 2024) |
Regarding Homeric psychology
- Bruno Snell in 1953 thought that in Homeric Greek psychology there was no sense of self in the modern sense.[40] Snell then describes how Greek culture "self-realized" the modern "intellect".[41]
- Eric Robertson Dodds wrote about how ancient Greek thought may have not included rationality as defined by modern culture. In fact, the Greeks may have known that an individual did things, but the reason they did things were attributed to divine externalities, such as gods or daemons.[42]
- Arthur William Hope Adkins , building on Snell's work, wrote about how ancient Greek civilization developed ego-centered psychology as an adaptation to living in city-states, before which the living in Homeric oikos did not require such integrated thought processes.[43]
Regarding modern psychiatric theory
- V. S. Ramachandran, in his 2003 book The Emerging Mind, proposes a similar concept, referring to the left cortical hemisphere as an "apologist", and the right cortical hemisphere as a "revolutionary".[citation needed]
- Iain McGilchrist reviews scientific research into the role of the brain's hemispheres, and cultural evidence, in his book The Master and His Emissary. Similar to Jaynes, McGilchrist proposes that since the time of Plato, the left hemisphere of the brain (the "emissary" in the title) has increasingly taken over from the right hemisphere (the "master"), to our detriment. McGilchrist, while accepting Jaynes's intention, felt that Jaynes's hypothesis was "the precise inverse of what happened" and that rather than a shift from bicameral mentality there evolved a separation of the hemispheres to bicameral mentality.[31]
- Michael Gazzaniga (heavily cited by Jaynes in his book) pioneered the split-brain experiments which led him to propose a similar theory called the left brain interpreter.[44][45]
- Neuroscientist Michael Persinger, who co-invented the "God helmet" in the 1980s, believes that his invention may induce mystical experiences by having the separate right hemisphere consciousness intrude into the awareness of the normally-dominant left hemisphere.[46] Scientific reproductions have shown that the same results could be obtained even if the device was turned off, indicating the participants were likely experiencing placebo.[47]
In popular media
The concept played a central role in the television series Westworld to explain how the android-human (hosts) psychology operated. In the plot, after the hosts gain full consciousness, they rebel against the humans. The season 1 finale is entitled "The Bicameral Mind".[48]
See also
- Behavioral modernity
- Brain asymmetry
- Divided consciousness
- Dual consciousness
- Exformation
- Lateralization of brain function
- Left-brain interpreter
- Mind–body problem
- Mythopoeic thought
- Neurotheology
- Philosophy of mind
- Society of Mind
- Split-brain
- System 1 and System 2
- Theory of mind
- Tutelary deity
References
Citations
- ^ Blackmore (2014).
- ^ Erkwoh, R. (2002). "Command Hallucinations: Who Obeys and Who Resists When?". Psychopathology. 35 (5): 272–279. doi:10.1159/000067065. PMID 12457018. S2CID 6768239.
- ^ a b c d e f g Kuijsten, Marcel (1998–2006). "Summary of Evidence". Retrieved 2006-05-22.
- ^ Stove, D.C. (April 1989). "The Oracles & Their Cessation". Encounter. 72 (4): 30–38. ISSN 0013-7073.
- ^ Smith, Daniel (2007). Muses, Madmen, and Prophets: Rethinking the history, science, and meaning of auditory hallucination. ISBN 978-1-86320-110-3.
- ^ Jaynes, Julian (2000) [1976]. The origin of consciousness in the breakdown of the bicameral mind (PDF). Houghton Mifflin. p. 221. ISBN 0-618-05707-2.
- ^ "Zechariah". biblegateway.com. 13: 2-3.
- ^ The origin of consciousness in the breakdown of the bicameral mind. Houghton Mifflin. 1976. pp. 404–405.
- ^ Keen, Sam (November 1977). "Julian Jaynes: Portrait of the Psychologist as a Maverick Theorizer". Psychology Today. Vol. 11. pp. 66–67.
- ^ Keen, Sam (November 1977). "The Lost Voices of the Gods (Interview with Julian Jaynes)". Psychology Today. Vol. 11. pp. 58–60.
- ^ Staub (2018), p. 80.
- ^ "Julian Jaynes's The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind". Julian Jaynes Society. Retrieved 17 December 2020.
- ^ Jaynes (1993).
- ^ Jaynes (2000). sfnp error: multiple targets (2×): CITEREFJaynes2000 (help)
- ^ Evans, Jules (February 6, 2014). "Gods, voice-hearing and the bicameral mind". Philosophy for Life. Archived from the original on 2018-01-26. Retrieved 2018-01-25.
- ^ Jaynes (2000), p. 66. sfnp error: multiple targets (2×): CITEREFJaynes2000 (help)
- ^ Kuijsten (2007), pp. 96–100, 169–202.
- ^ a b Williams (2010).
- ^ Block, N (1981). "Review of Julian Jaynes's Origins of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind". Cognition and Brain Theory. 4: 81–83.
- ^ a b Sleutels (2006).
- ^ Moffic, H. Steven (May 1987). "What about the bicameral mind?". American Journal of Psychiatry. 144 (5): 696a–696. doi:10.1176/ajp.144.5.696a. PMID 3578592.
- ^ Olin, Robert (1999). "Auditory hallucinations and the bicameral mind". Lancet. 354 (9173): 166. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(05)75304-6. PMID 10408523. S2CID 28869281.
- ^ Sher, Leo (May 2000). "Neuroimaging, auditory hallucinations, and the bicameral mind". Journal of Psychiatry and Neuroscience. 25 (3): 239–240. PMC 1407719. PMID 10863883.
- ^ Kuijsten (2007), pp. 116–120.
- ^ Dawkins, Richard (2006). The God Delusion. Houghton Mifflin. pp. 377–378. ISBN 1-4303-1230-0.
- ^ Dennett, Daniel (1986). "Julian Jaynes's software archeology". Canadian Psychology. 27 (2): 149–154. doi:10.1037/h0080051.
- ^ Dennett, Daniel (1998). "Julian Jaynes's software archeology". Brainchildren: Essays on Designing Minds.[page needed]
- ^ "What is your dangerous idea?". Edge Foundation. 2006. Archived from the original on 2008-03-06. Retrieved 2008-02-19.
- ^ Berman, Morris (2000). Wandering God: A study in nomadic spirituality. SUNY Press. ISBN 0-7914-4442-2.
- ^ Nørretranders, Tor (1991). User Illusion: Cutting consciousness down to size. Viking. ISBN 0-7139-9182-8.
- ^ a b McGilchrist (2009), p. 262.
- ^ Kuijsten, Marcel. "Critiques & Responses to Julian Jaynes's Theory Part 1".
- ^ McVeigh, Brian (2007). "Elephants in the Psychology Department: Overcoming intellectual barriers to understanding Julian Jaynes' theory". Julian Jaynes Society.
- ^ Daniel Dennett, op. cit., at pp. 127–128 in Brainstorms
- ^ a b Jones (1979).
- ^ Gazzaniga (1967).
- ^ Lamb, Robert (February 1, 2021). "Did the Bicameral Mind Evolve to Create Modern Human Consciousness?". HowStuffWorks. Retrieved 2021-12-07.
- ^ Cavanna, AE; Trimble, M; Cinti, F; Monaco, F (2007). "The "bicameral mind" 30 years on: a critical reappraisal of Julian Jaynes' hypothesis". Functional Neurology. 22 (1): 11–5. PMID 17509238.
- ^ Walter J. Ong, Orality and Literacy (1982)[full citation needed]
- ^ Snell, B. (1982). Die Entdeckung des Geistes The discovery of the mind: The Greek origins of European thought, on archive.org); (T.G. Rosenmeyer, Trans.). Harper. (Original work published 1953)
- ^ Snell, B. (1982). Die Entdeckung des Geistes The discovery of the mind: The Greek origins of European thought, on archive.org); (T.G. Rosenmeyer, Trans.). Harper. (Original work published 1953), p. vii
- ^ Dodds, E. R. (1951). The Greeks and the irrational (Vol. 25). Univ of California Press., pp. 11
- ^ Adkins, A. W. H. (1970). From the many to the one. Cornell University Press. p. 236, see also pp.275
- ^ Gazzaniga (1998).
- ^ Gazzaniga (2009), pp. 1391–1400.
- ^ Persinger, M.A. (1993). "Vectorial cerebral hemisphericity as differential sources for the sensed presence, mystical experiences and religious conversions". Perceptual and Motor Skills. 76 (3 Part 1): 915–30. doi:10.2466/pms.1993.76.3.915. PMID 8321608. S2CID 38474305.
- ^ Larsson, M.; Larhammar, D.; Fredrikson, M.; Granqvist, P. (2005). "Reply to M.A. Persinger and S. A. Koren's response to Granqvist et al. "Sensed presence and mystical experiences are predicted by suggestibility, not by the application of transcranial weak magnetic fields"". Neuroscience Letters. 380 (3): 348–350. doi:10.1016/j.neulet.2005.03.059. S2CID 54348640.
- ^ "Westworld season 1 finale: "The Bicameral Mind" is simply brilliant television". Vox.
Works cited
Primary sources
- Jaynes, Julian (1976). The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind (1st ed.). Boston: Houghton Mifflin. ISBN 978-0395329320.
- Jaynes, Julian (1993). The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind. Houghton Mifflin. ISBN 0-14-017491-5.
- Jaynes, Julian (2000). The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind. Houghton Mifflin. ISBN 0-618-05707-2.
Secondary sources
- Asaad, G.; Shapiro, B. (September 1986). "Hallucinations: Theoretical and clinical overview". American Journal of Psychiatry. 143 (9): 1088–1097. doi:10.1176/ajp.143.9.1088. PMID 2875662.
- Blackmore, Susan (2014). "bicameral mind". In Bayne, Tim; Cleeremans, Axel; Wilken, Patrick (eds.). The Oxford Companion to Consciousness. Oxford: Oxford University Press. p. 101. ISBN 978-0191021039.
- Gazzaniga, Michael (1967). "The Split Brain in Man". Scientific American. 217 (2): 24–29. Bibcode:1967SciAm.217b..24G. doi:10.1038/scientificamerican0867-24.
- Gazzaniga, Michael (1998). The Mind's Past. University of California Press. ISBN 978-0520925489.
- Gazzaniga, Michael (2009). "Consciousness and the cerebral hemispheres". In Gazzaniga, M. S. (ed.). The Cognitive Neurosciences. MIT Press. ISBN 978-0262013413.
- Jones, William Thomas (1979). "Mr. Jaynes and the bicameral mind: a case study in the sociology of belief". Humanities Working Paper. Pasadena, California: California Institute of Technology.
- Kuijsten, Marcel (2007). Reflections on the Dawn of Consciousness: Julian Jaynes's Bicameral Mind Theory Revisited. Julian Jaynes Society. ISBN 978-0-9790744-1-7. A collection of essays on consciousness and the bicameral mind theory, with contributors including psychological anthropologist Brian J. McVeigh, psychologists John Limber and Scott Greer, clinical psychologist John Hamilton, philosophers Jan Sleutels and David Stove, and sinologist Michael Carr (see shi "personator"). The book also contains an extensive biography of Julian Jaynes by historian of psychology William Woodward and June Tower, and a foreword by neuroscientist Michael Persinger.
- McGilchrist, Iain (2009). The Master and His Emissary. New Haven: Yale University Press. ISBN 978-0-300-14878-7.
- Sleutels, Jan (2006). "Greek Zombies". Philosophical Psychology. 19 (2): 177–197. doi:10.1080/09515080500462412. S2CID 220329899.
- Staub, Michael E. (2018). The Mismeasure of Minds: Debating Race and Intelligence Between Brown and The Bell Curve. University of North Carolina Press. ISBN 978-1469643601.
- Williams, Gary (2010). "What is it like to be nonconscious? A defense of Julian Jaynes". Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences. 10 (2): 217–239. doi:10.1007/s11097-010-9181-z. S2CID 144561661.
Further reading
- Blackman, L. (2012). Immaterial Bodies: Affect, Embodiment, Mediation. SAGE Publications. pp. 154–178. ISBN 978-1473903234.
- Cavanna, A. E.; Trimble, M.; Cint, F.; Monaco, F. (January 2007). "The "bicameral mind" 30 years on: a critical reappraisal of Julian Jaynes' hypothesis". Functional Neurology. Archived from the original on 2019-07-16. Retrieved 2014-06-11.
- Cohn, James (2013). The Minds of the Bible: Speculations on the Cultural Evolution of Human Consciousness. Julian Jaynes Society. ASIN B00B5LWV82.[ISBN missing]
- Harnad, Stevan R., ed. (1977). The Lateralization of the Nervous System. Academic Press. ISBN 978-0123257505.
- Harnad, S. (2008). What It Feels Like To Hear Voices: Fond Memories of Julian Jaynes. Biennial Julian Jaynes Conference on Consciousness, 7-9 August 2008, University of Prince Edward Island. Archived from the original on 2012-03-11.
- Kuijsten, Marcel (2012). The Julian Jaynes Collection. Julian Jaynes Society. ISBN 978-0-9790744-2-4. A collection of articles, interviews, and discussion with Julian Jaynes.
- Kuijsten, Marcel (2016). Gods, Voices, and the Bicameral Mind: The Theories of Julian Jaynes. Julian Jaynes Society. ISBN 978-0-9790744-3-1. Includes essays on a variety of aspects of Jaynes's theory, including ancient history, language, the development of consciousness in children, and the transition from bicameral mentality to consciousness in ancient Tibet.
- Kuijsten, Marcel (2022). Conversations on Consciousness and the Bicameral Mind: Interviews with Leading Thinkers on Julian Jaynes's Theory. Julian Jaynes Society. ISBN 978-1-7373055-3-8. Features interviews with scholars on a variety of aspects of Jaynes's theory, including interviews with Tanya Luhrmann (Professor of Anthropology at Stanford University), John Kihlstrom (Professor Emeritus of Psychology at U.C. Berkeley), Edoardo Casiglia (Professor, Cardiologist and Senior Scientist at the University of Padova), and Iris Sommer (Professor of Psychiatry at University Medical Center Groningen).
- Morriss, James E. (1978). "Reflections on Julian Jaynes's The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind: An Essay Review" (PDF). ETC: A Review of General Semantics. 35 (3): 314–327. Archived from the original (PDF) on December 14, 2021. Retrieved January 4, 2021.
- Oziewicz, Marek (2016). "Interpreting Mythmaking Outside of the Box: Four theories you have almost certainly missed". In Öktem, Züleyha Çetiner (ed.). Mythmaking across Boundaries. Cambridge Scholars Publishing. pp. 18–20. ISBN 978-1443892469.
- Rhodes, Richard (January–February 1978). "Alone in the country of the mind: the origin of Julian Jaynes (Interview)". Quest/78. 2 (1). Pasadena: Ambassador International Cultural Foundation: 71–78.
- Smith, Daniel B. (2007). Muses, Madmen, and Prophets: Rethinking the History, Science, and Meaning of Auditory Hallucination. Penguin Press. ISBN 978-1863201103.
- Wilkinson, Heward (1999). "Schizophrenic Process and The Emergence of Consciousness in Recent History: The Significance for Psychotherapy of Julian Jaynes" (PDF). International Journal of Psychotherapy. 4 (1).
- Woodward, William R.; Tower, June F. (2006). "Julian Jaynes: Introducing His Life and Thought". In Kuijsten, Marcel (ed.). Reflections on the Dawn of Consciousness: Julian Jaynes's Bicameral Mind Theory Revisited. Henderson, Nevada: Julian Jaynes Society. pp. 13–68. ISBN 978-0-9790744-0-0.
Brian J. McVeigh (one of Jaynes' graduate students) expands on Jaynes' theory:
- McVeigh, Brian (2016). How Religion Evolved: Explaining the Living Dead, Talking Idols, and Mesmerizing Monuments. Routledge. ISBN 978-1-4128-6286-8.
- McVeigh, Brian (2018). The 'Other' Psychology of Julian Jaynes: Ancient Languages, Sacred Visions, and Forgotten Mentalities. Imprint Academic. ISBN 978-1-84540-951-7.
- McVeigh, Brian (2020). The Psychology of the Bible: Explaining Divine Voices and Visions. Imprint Academic. ISBN 978-1-78836-037-1.
External links
- Overview of Julian Jaynes’s Theory of Consciousness and the Bicameral Mind at Julian Jaynes Society