Bicameral mentality

Last updated

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 that appears to be "speaking" and a second part that 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 makes 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.

Contents

The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind

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 . [2] 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, nonconscious mental schema wherein volition in the face of novel stimuli was mediated through a linguistic control mechanism and experienced as auditory verbal hallucinations.

Definition

Bicameral mentality is nonconscious 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. [3] Rather than making conscious evaluations in novel or unexpected situations, the person hallucinated a voice or "god" giving admonitory advice or commands and obeyed 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. [4]

Influences

Regarding Homeric psychology

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 was attributed to divine externalities, such as gods or daemons. [5] Bruno Snell in 1953 thought that in Homeric Greek psychology there was no sense of self in the modern sense. [6] Snell then describes how Greek culture "self-realized" the modern "intellect". [7] Arthur William Hope Adkins  [ de ], 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. [8]

Regarding neurological models

The neurological model in The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind is a radical neuroscientific hypothesis that was based on research novel at the time, mainly on Michael Gazzaniga's split-brain experiments [9] [10] and left-brain interpreter theory. [11] [12] The more general idea of a "divided self" (contrasted with a "unitary self") has found support from psychological and neurological studies. [13]

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. [14] Citing Dodds, Snell, and Adkins, [15] Jaynes proposed 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 that were recorded in ancient myths, legends, and historical accounts. This is exemplified in not only the commands given to characters in ancient epics but also the very muses of Greek mythology who "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 that 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. [14]

In ancient times, Jaynes noted, gods were generally much more numerous and much more anthropomorphic than in modern times, and he speculates that this was because each bicameral person had their own "god" who reflected their own desires and experiences. [16]

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. [14] This adaptation to the village communities of 100 individuals or more formed the core of religion.

Citing Gazzaniga, 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. [14]

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. [14] 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 that people with schizophrenia feel a loss of identity due to hallucinated voices taking the place of their internal monologue. [17]

As support for Jaynes's argument, these command hallucinations are little different from the commands from gods that feature prominently in ancient stories. [14] Indirect evidence supporting Jaynes's theory that hallucinations once played an important role in human mentality can be found in the book Muses, Madmen, and Prophets: Rethinking the History, Science, and Meaning of Auditory Hallucination by Daniel Smith. [18]

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 sociocultural equilibria sustained by this bicameral mindset.

The Late Bronze Age collapse of the 2nd millennium BCE led to mass migrations and created a rash of unexpected situations and stresses that 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. [19]

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. [14] 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. [20]

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. [21]

Reception and influence

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. [22] [23] The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind was a successful work of popular science, selling out the first print run before a second could replace it. [15] It received dozens of positive book reviews, including those by well-known critics such as John Updike in The New Yorker, Christopher Lehmann-Haupt in the New York Times, [24] and Marshall McLuhan in the Toronto Globe and Mail. Articles on Jaynes and his ideas appeared in Time in 1977, [25] and in Quest/78 in 1978. [26] The book was nominated for the National Book Award in Contemporary Thought in 1978. [27] Philip K. Dick, Terrence McKenna, and David Bowie have all cited the book as an influence. [28]

Scholarly reactions

According to Jaynes, language is a necessary but not sufficient condition for consciousness: Language existed thousands of years earlier, but consciousness did not emerge as soon as language did. [29] 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. [30]

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. [31] [32] [33]

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, [33] against Ned Block's criticism that it is "ridiculous" to suppose that consciousness is a cultural construction, [34] while the Dutch philosophy professor Jan Sleutels offers an additional critique of Block. [32]

H. Steven Moffic questioned why Jaynes's theory was left out of a discussion on auditory hallucinations by Asaad & Shapiro (1986). [35] The authors' published response was, "Jaynes' hypothesis makes for interesting reading and stimulates much thought in the receptive reader. It does not, however, adequately explain one of the central mysteries of madness: hallucination." [36]

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. [37] [38] [39]

Jaynes described the range of responses to his book as "from people who feel [the ideas are] very important all the way to very strong hostility. ... When someone comes along and says consciousness is in history, it can't be accepted. If [psychologists] did accept it, they wouldn't have the motivation to go back into the laboratory ..." [26]

Marcel Kuijsten, founder of the Julian Jaynes Society, wrote that in the decades since the book's publication, "there have been few in-depth discussions, either positive or negative" about it, rejecting as too simplistic the criticism that "Jaynes was wrong". [40]

Individual scholars' comments

Sociologist W. T. Jones asked in 1979, "Why, despite its implausibility, is [Jaynes's] book taken seriously by thoughtful and intelligent people?" [41] 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 ..." [41]

Walter J. Ong noted 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. [42]

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: [43] "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." [44]

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. [45]

William P. Frost wrote that "this book threw oil on the fire of the New Age mentality and its courting of the paranormal and the occult". [46]

Historian of science Morris Berman writes: "[Jaynes's] description of this new consciousness is one of the best I have come across." [47]

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." [48]

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." [49]

In 2007, Cavanna, Trimble, Cinti and Monaco wrote in Functional Neurology that "Even today, it has been argued that a multidisciplinary approach to the problem of consciousness and its development in the evolutionary process that shaped Homo sapiens cannot leave out an analysis of Jaynes' theory of the origin of consciousness in the breakdown of the preconscious bicameral mind", [13] citing Canadian psychologist, neuroanthropologist, and cognitive neuroscientist Merlin Donald [50] and American psychiatrist Stanley Greenspan. [51]

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. [52]

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." [53] Kuijsten maintained that McGilchrist mischaracterized Jaynes's theory. [54]

Conferences

There have been a number of conferences and symposiums dedicated to Julian Jaynes's theory. These include:

Literature

A number of publications discuss and expand on Julian Jaynes's theory, including three books by Brian J. McVeigh (one of Jaynes' graduate students) which expand on Jaynes' theories:

Similar ideas

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. [60] 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. [61]

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". [62]

Iain McGilchrist reviews scientific research into the role of the brain's hemispheres, and cultural evidence, in his 2009 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. [53]

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". [63] [64]

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Consciousness</span> Awareness of existence

Consciousness, at its simplest, is awareness of internal and external existence. However, its nature has led to millennia of analyses, explanations, and debate by philosophers, scientists, and theologians. Opinions differ about what exactly needs to be studied or even considered consciousness. In some explanations, it is synonymous with the mind, and at other times, an aspect of it. In the past, it was one's "inner life", the world of introspection, of private thought, imagination, and volition. Today, it often includes any kind of cognition, experience, feeling, or perception. It may be awareness, awareness of awareness, metacognition, or self-awareness, either continuously changing or not. The disparate range of research, notions and speculations raises a curiosity about whether the right questions are being asked.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Julian Jaynes</span> American psychologist

Julian Jaynes was an American psychologist at Yale and Princeton for nearly 25 years, best known for his 1976 book The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind. His career was dedicated to the problem of consciousness: "the difference between what others see of us and our sense of our inner selves and the deep feelings that sustain it. ... Men have been conscious of the problem of consciousness almost since consciousness began." Jaynes's solution touches on many disciplines, including neuroscience, linguistics, psychology, archeology, history, religion and analysis of ancient texts.

<i>The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind</i> 1976 book by Julian Jaynes

The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind is a 1976 book by the Princeton psychologist, psychohistorian and consciousness theorist Julian Jaynes (1920-1997). It explores the nature of consciousness – particularly "the ability to introspect" – and its evolution in ancient human history. Jaynes proposes that consciousness is a learned behavior rooted in language and culture rather than being innate. He distinguishes consciousness from sensory awareness and cognition. Jaynes introduces the concept of the "bicameral mind", a non-conscious mentality prevalent in early humans that relied on auditory hallucinations.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Dream</span> Event occurring in the mind while sleeping

A dream is a succession of images, ideas, emotions, and sensations that usually occur involuntarily in the mind during certain stages of sleep. Humans spend about two hours dreaming per night, and each dream lasts around 5–20 minutes, although the dreamer may perceive the dream as being much longer than this.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Cognitive neuroscience</span> Scientific field

Cognitive neuroscience is the scientific field that is concerned with the study of the biological processes and aspects that underlie cognition, with a specific focus on the neural connections in the brain which are involved in mental processes. It addresses the questions of how cognitive activities are affected or controlled by neural circuits in the brain. Cognitive neuroscience is a branch of both neuroscience and psychology, overlapping with disciplines such as behavioral neuroscience, cognitive psychology, physiological psychology and affective neuroscience. Cognitive neuroscience relies upon theories in cognitive science coupled with evidence from neurobiology, and computational modeling.

Greedy reductionism, identified by Daniel Dennett, in his 1995 book Darwin's Dangerous Idea, is a kind of erroneous reductionism. Whereas "good" reductionism means explaining a thing in terms of what it reduces to, greedy reductionism occurs when "in their eagerness for a bargain, in their zeal to explain too much too fast, scientists and philosophers ... underestimate the complexities, trying to skip whole layers or levels of theory in their rush to fasten everything securely and neatly to the foundation". Using the terminology of "cranes" and "skyhooks" built up earlier in the chapter, Dennett recapitulates his initial definition of the term in the chapter summary on p. 83: "Good reductionists suppose that all Design can be explained without skyhooks; greedy reductionists suppose it can all be explained without cranes."

Eliminative materialism is a materialist position in the philosophy of mind. It is the idea that the majority of mental states in folk psychology do not exist. Some supporters of eliminativism argue that no coherent neural basis will be found for many everyday psychological concepts such as belief or desire, since they are poorly defined. The argument is that psychological concepts of behavior and experience should be judged by how well they reduce to the biological level. Other versions entail the nonexistence of conscious mental states such as pain and visual perceptions.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Split-brain</span> Condition of the human brain

Split-brain or callosal syndrome is a type of disconnection syndrome when the corpus callosum connecting the two hemispheres of the brain is severed to some degree. It is an association of symptoms produced by disruption of, or interference with, the connection between the hemispheres of the brain. The surgical operation to produce this condition involves transection of the corpus callosum, and is usually a last resort to treat refractory epilepsy. Initially, partial callosotomies are performed; if this operation does not succeed, a complete callosotomy is performed to mitigate the risk of accidental physical injury by reducing the severity and violence of epileptic seizures. Before using callosotomies, epilepsy is instead treated through pharmaceutical means. After surgery, neuropsychological assessments are often performed.

Hearing Voices Networks, closely related to the Hearing Voices Movement, are peer-focused national organizations for people who hear voices and supporting family members, activists and mental health practitioners. Members may or may not have a psychiatric diagnosis. Networks promote an alternative approach, where voices are not necessarily seen as signs of mental illness and regard hearing voices as a meaningful and understandable, although unusual, human variation. Voices are not seen as the problem, rather it is the relationship the person has with their voices that is regarded as the main issue.

Michael S. Gazzaniga is an American psychologist who is a professor of psychology at the University of California, Santa Barbara, where he heads the new SAGE Center for the Study of the Mind. He is one of the leading researchers in cognitive neuroscience, the study of the neural basis of mind. He is a member of the American Academy of Arts & Sciences, the Institute of Medicine, and the National Academy of Sciences.

Joseph E. Bogen was an American neurophysiologist who specialized in split brain research and focused on theories of consciousness. He was a clinical professor of neurosurgery at the University of Southern California, Adjunct Professor of Psychology at UCLA, and a visiting professor at Caltech.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Lateralization of brain function</span> Specialization of some cognitive functions in one side of the brain

The lateralization of brain function is the tendency for some neural functions or cognitive processes to be specialized to one side of the brain or the other. The median longitudinal fissure separates the human brain into two distinct cerebral hemispheres, connected by the corpus callosum. Although the macrostructure of the two hemispheres appears to be almost identical, different composition of neuronal networks allows for specialized function that is different in each hemisphere.

Ernest Ropiequet "Jack" Hilgard was an American psychologist and professor at Stanford University. He became famous in the 1950s for his research on hypnosis, especially with regard to pain control. Along with André Muller Weitzenhoffer, Hilgard developed the Stanford Hypnotic Susceptibility Scales. A Review of General Psychology survey, published in 2002, ranked Hilgard as the 29th most cited psychologist of the 20th century.

Brian J. McVeigh is an American scholar of Asia who specializes in Japanese pop art, education, politics, and history. He is also a theorist of cultural psychology and historical changes in human mentality. He received his doctorate in 1991 from Princeton University's Department of Anthropology. While a graduate student, he studied under Julian Jaynes whose influence is apparent in his research. He taught at the University of Arizona until 2013 and is a licensed mental health counselor. Currently he is researching how a Jaynesian psychology can be developed for therapeutic purposes, as seen in his The Self-healing Mind: Harnessing the Active Ingredients of Psychotherapy.

<i>The Master and His Emissary</i> 2009 book by Iain McGilchrist

The Master and His Emissary: The Divided Brain and the Making of the Western World is a 2009 book written by psychiatrist Iain McGilchrist that deals with the specialist hemispheric functioning of the brain. The differing world views of the right and left brain have, according to the author, shaped Western culture since the time of the ancient Greek philosopher Plato, and the growing conflict between these views has implications for the way the modern world is changing. In part, McGilchrist's book, which is the product of twenty years of research, reviews the evidence of previous related research and theories, and based on this and cultural evidence, the author arrives at his own conclusions.

Terence Hawkins is an American author of numerous short stories and two novels, American Neolithic, published by C&R Press, and The Rage of Achilles, a recounting of the Iliad in the form of a novel. In 2016, Hawkins pleaded guilty to one count of larceny for embezzling almost half a million dollars that had belonged to the clients of his law office. He has since been released from prison.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Left-brain interpreter</span> Neuropsychological concept

The left-brain interpreter is a neuropsychological concept developed by the psychologist Michael S. Gazzaniga and the neuroscientist Joseph E. LeDoux. It refers to the construction of explanations by the left brain hemisphere in order to make sense of the world by reconciling new information with what was known before. The left-brain interpreter attempts to rationalize, reason and generalize new information it receives in order to relate the past to the present.

The collective cognitive imperative is an internal command or obligation felt by suggestible people that often drives their joining some group. Besides requiring the person accept the group’s belief system, it outlines culturally agreed on behavioral constraints and roles to be acted out. While the group is usually thought of as a formally well-defined one such as a tribe, church, cult, or commune, this imperative can be less rigorously connected to peer pressure—in which case it can apply to ill-defined groups like being "a cool person". It can likewise be related to joining the "winners" through "The Bandwagon Effect".

Dual consciousness is a hypothesis or concept in neuroscience. It is proposed that it is possible that a person may develop two separate conscious entities within their one brain after undergoing a corpus callosotomy. The idea first began circulating in the neuroscience community after some split-brain patients exhibited alien hand syndrome (AHS), which led some scientists to believe that there must be two separate consciousnesses within the brain's left and right hemispheres in competition with one another once the corpus callosum is severed.

References

Citations

  1. ↑ Blackmore (2014).
  2. ↑ Harnad (1977).
  3. ↑ Oziewicz (2016), pp. 18–20.
  4. ↑ Erkwoh, R. (2002). "Command Hallucinations: Who Obeys and Who Resists When?". Psychopathology. 35 (5): 272–279. doi:10.1159/000067065. PMID   12457018. S2CID   6768239.
  5. ↑ Dodds, E. R. (1951). The Greeks and the Irrational. Vol. 25. University of California Press. pp. 11ff.
  6. ↑ Snell (1953), p. iv.
  7. ↑ Snell (1953), p. vii.
  8. ↑ Adkins, A. W. H. (1970). From the Many to the One. Cornell University Press. pp. 236, 275.
  9. ↑ Gazzaniga (1967).
  10. ↑ Lamb, Robert (February 1, 2021). "Did the Bicameral Mind Evolve to Create Modern Human Consciousness?". HowStuffWorks. Retrieved 2021-12-07.
  11. ↑ Gazzaniga (1998).
  12. ↑ Gazzaniga (2009), pp. 1391–1400.
  13. 1 2 Cavanna et al. (2007).
  14. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Kuijsten (2023).
  15. 1 2 Rowe (2012).
  16. ↑ Stove, D. C. (April 1989). "The Oracles & Their Cessation". Encounter. 72 (4): 30–38. ISSN   0013-7073.
  17. ↑ Wilkinson (1999).
  18. ↑ Smith (2007).
  19. ↑ Morin (2009), p. 399.
  20. ↑ Jaynes (2000), p. 221.
  21. ↑ Jaynes (1976), pp. 404–405.
  22. ↑ Keen, Sam (November 1977). "Julian Jaynes: Portrait of the Psychologist as a Maverick Theorizer". Psychology Today . Vol. 11. pp. 66–67.
  23. ↑ Keen, Sam (November 1977). "The Lost Voices of the Gods (Interview with Julian Jaynes)". Psychology Today. Vol. 11. pp. 58–60.
  24. ↑ Lehmann-Haupt, Christopher (February 9, 1977). "Books of the Times". The New York Times . p. 51. Retrieved 2024-02-16.
  25. ↑ Leo, John (1977). "The Lost Voices of the Gods". Time . Vol. 14. Retrieved 2024-02-16.
  26. 1 2 Rhodes, Richard (January–February 1978). "Alone in the Country of the Mind". Quest/78. 2 (1). Pasadena: Ambassador International Cultural Foundation: 71–78.
  27. ↑ Staub (2018), p. 80.
  28. ↑ 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.
  29. ↑ Jaynes (2000), p. 66.
  30. ↑ Kuijsten (2007), pp. 96–100, 169–202.
  31. ↑ Dennett (1981), pp. 127–128.
  32. 1 2 Sleutels (2006).
  33. 1 2 Williams (2010).
  34. ↑ 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.
  35. ↑ 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.
  36. ↑ Razam (2013), p. 325.
  37. ↑ 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.
  38. ↑ Sher, Leo (May 2000). "Neuroimaging, auditory hallucinations, and the bicameral mind". Journal of Psychiatry and Neuroscience. 25 (3): 239–240. PMC   1407719 . PMID   10863883.
  39. ↑ Kuijsten (2007), pp. 116–120.
  40. ↑ Kuijsten, Marcel (2006). "Introduction". In Kuijsten, Marcel (ed.). Reflections on the Dawn of Consciousness: Julian Jaynes's Bicameral Mind Theory Revisited (First ed.). Henderson NV: Julian Jaynes Society. ISBN   978-0-9790744-0-0.
  41. 1 2 Jones (1979).
  42. ↑ Ong, Walter J. (1982). Orality and Literacy: The Technologizing of the Word. Methuen.
  43. ↑ Dennett, Daniel (1986). "Julian Jaynes's software archeology". Canadian Psychology. 27 (2): 149–154. doi:10.1037/h0080051.
  44. ↑ Dennett, Daniel (1998). "Julian Jaynes's software archeology". Brainchildren: Essays on Designing Minds .[ page needed ]
  45. ↑ Nørretranders, Tor (1991). User Illusion: Cutting consciousness down to size . Viking. ISBN   0-7139-9182-8.
  46. ↑ Frost, William P. (1992). What is the New Age?: Defining Third Millennium Consciousness. E. Mellen Press. ISBN   978-0773491922.
  47. ↑ Berman, Morris (2000). Wandering God: A Study in Nomadic Spirituality. SUNY Press. ISBN   0-7914-4442-2.
  48. ↑ Dawkins, Richard (2006). The God Delusion . Houghton Mifflin. pp.  377–378. ISBN   1-4303-1230-0.
  49. ↑ Cochran, Gregory (2006). "What is your dangerous idea?". Edge: The World Question Center. Edge Foundation. Archived from the original on 2008-03-06. Retrieved 2008-02-19.
  50. ↑ Donald (1991).
  51. ↑ Greenspan & Shanker (2004).
  52. ↑ McVeigh, Brian (2007). "Elephants in the Psychology Department: Overcoming intellectual barriers to understanding Julian Jaynes' theory". In Kuijsten, Marcel (ed.). Gods, Voices, and the Bicameral Mind: The Theories of Julian Jaynes. Julian Jaynes Society. ISBN   978-0-9790744-3-1.
  53. 1 2 McGilchrist (2009), p. 262.
  54. ↑ Kuijsten, Marcel. "Critiques & Responses to Julian Jaynes's Theory Part 1".
  55. ↑ Jaynes, J.; Dennett, D.; Miller, J.; Ojemann, G.; Witelson, S. F.; Kristofferson, A. B., eds. (1986). "McMaster-Bauer symposium on consciousness". Canadian Psychology / Psychologie Canadienne. 27 (2): 122–182. doi:10.1037/h0084601.
  56. ↑ "Harvard Symposium on Julian Jaynes's Theory". Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University. December 2–3, 1988 – via Julian Jaynes Society.
  57. ↑ McVeigh, Brian (2016). How Religion Evolved: Explaining the Living Dead, Talking Idols, and Mesmerizing Monuments. Routledge. ISBN   978-1-4128-6286-8.
  58. ↑ "Toward a Science of Consciousness 2008". University of Arizona: Center for Consciousness Studies.
  59. ↑ "The Julian Jaynes Society Conference on Consciousness and Bicameral Studies". Julian Jaynes Society. June 2013.
  60. ↑ 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.
  61. ↑ 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.
  62. ↑ Ramachandran, V. S. (2003). The Emerging Mind. Profile Books. ISBN   1-86197-303-9.
  63. ↑ St. James, Emily (December 5, 2016). "Westworld season 1 finale: "The Bicameral Mind" is simply brilliant television". Vox.
  64. ↑ Crabill (2018).

Works cited

Primary sources

Secondary sources

Further reading

This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.