in the reascendancy of the bi-cameral mind.
Dr. Sanity has up an extraordinary post that postulates that Julian Jayne’s famous hypothesis has now met its reversal.
Unrelated (mostly): is there anyone who knows how to append this gif to the signature line of one’s email? (h/t David Thompson)
Eco-Fur doesn’t sell. I say make toupees out of it.
possum? possum!? who are you Jed Clampett?
I was not aware of Jaynes theory but it seems to me that it’s primitive analogy is the basis behind the fable of Cain and Abel. No?
Adam and Eve for that matter.
Hadn’t thought of that, ducktrapper. Interesting.
My take on Abel & Cain is that it argues against settlement, civilization, agriculture and for a nomadic, pastoral existence. Perhaps the message is that agriculture is an attempt to assume control of the availability of foodstuffs, whereas the pastoralist relies more on God, on things being more out of his control: they neither reap nor sow.
I’ve still got Jaynes’ book, “The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind”. Very interesting, still. Gives great insight into how we went from pre-Homeric drives of voices to induce actions, towards actual consciousness. Definitely have to check out the links… Thanks for the pointers.
PW definitely shows both high-brow crap and knuckle-dragging leering on the same page!
Thanks, Big Dan. Mind if I use that as a blurb?
but instead had their behavior directed by auditory hallucinations….
Doesn’t sound very evolutionarily beneficial to me – hopefully.
Who said that?
The Wiki page mentions Burroughs, who added his own twist to Jayne’s theory, postulating that the world’s first leaders (caveman-politicians, basically) were those who, during that evolutionary transition into what we call consciousness, were able to make others mistake their commands for the fading Homeric inner commands, and that the structures of “control” that we’re left with now are echoes of that.
That’s metaphorically sound, certainly.
And the fact that rule remains highly hereditary (while not seeming so, and mostly not even consciously being so; note every election’s “Candidate X is Candidate Y’s second cousin twice removed and they don’t know it! Wow!” stories) suggests he was onto something.
Well, we’re here.
And we’re really bad at judging what’s evolutionarily beneficial. And that’s evolutionarily beneficial.
Apparently.
When I first heard of this cognitive division, I said to myself, “I’ve half-a-mind to question that.”
Dan said, “My take on Abel & Cain is that it argues against settlement, civilization, agriculture and for a nomadic, pastoral existence.”
Some say it is just a parable that boils down to : God (or fortune) seems to favor certain people no matter what you do; that’s no reason to kill them.
The Greek goddess of fortune, Tyche, was considered a protectress of cities.
DanC, knock yourself out. I was kinda rushed at the time so edit it as you see fit.
Try this: “PW: High-brow crap AND knuckle-dragging leering! Why choose?”
“Who said that?”
Wikipedia via Dan’s link.
////
“Well, we’re here.”
That’s my point about Jayne’s apparent allegation concerning auditory hallucinations – I’ve never read anything at all by Jayne.
Imo, true auditory hallucinations would be almost entirely non-beneficial – just as they are for certain of the truely psychotic Homeless – because hallucinations have a dysfunctional relationship to reality, by definition – and by fact, at least as it currently seems.
That is, unless a niche is provided somehow for those with the hallucinations, also as is the case for the genuinely Homeless, if their case tells us anything about past hominids.
It’s possible that those early homo sapiens with auditory hallucinations were in fact accorded some esteemed place within early societies and would have been selected for instead of against.
But I still don’t see what this has to do with the evolution of consciousness per se, which could have just as easily occurred without the need of any hallucinations whatsoever, especially given the apparent need for humans to deal with reality in order to survive, imo.
And the people Dr. Sanity is talking about are not really hallucinating, imo, so much as thinking that they can construct an alternative reality by specifically denying reality almost by an act of will, apparently spurred by a fear of reality, especially a fear of death.
They are even taught this option by Postmodernism, Relativism, Multiculturalism, Nihilism, Solipsism, and so on, which possibly also build upon whatever is involved with Narcissism.
But I admit I’m just shooting from the hip, and am definitely not The Decider.
Re: Who said that?
Whoosh! Get it? A post on auditory hallucinations? Who said that? OK, enough.
As for the auditory hallucinations, according to my recollection of Jaynes, it took the form more of suggestions/commands from one hemisphere to “inform” the other hemisphere of something or other they “should” be doing. A bi-cameral mind literally would mean that the two hemispheres of the brain couldn’t easily communicate directly with each other. Sort of like the movie Ratatouille, where the rat hides under your cap and has to inform you of “its” decisions by pulling strands of your hair: Not a constant hearing of voices, more of occasional commands.
Jaynes also makes the case that schizophrenia is something of a throwback to the bi-cameral mind. Not sure how much of this is still considered useful, and I haven’t read the wiki entry, but that’s my take on what Jaynes was saying.
The book got me to read parts of the Iliad compared to the Odyssey, specifically to see how the motivations of the ancients were recorded. Lots of talk about their “thumos” driving them to do something, instead of their “deciding” to do it. That’s the best I can recall, it’s been decades since I last studied the book.
Here we go.
Too much coffee for me, not enough thorazine.
Interesting recent article relating auditory hallucinations to autism