1
   

Today's battle between the bicameral brain & conscious self

 
 
Reply Fri 16 May, 2003 09:06 am
Today's battle between the bicameral brain & conscious self-responsibility.

I bought Julian Hayne's book, The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind, in 1976 because I was fascinated by the idea that people who deteriorate into schizophrenic psychoses are suffering a return to the bicameral brain, a new way of looking at the mental illness. I also was interested in learning how humans developed the numerous languages that exist.

I came across this treatise that presents the author's opinions re Jayne's book and its theories. I know nothing of the author of this Chapter or the others provided at this site, but his recap of Jayne's seems accurate from my memory of the book.

I was interested in the perspective of how religions and governments evolved and how it impacts humanity in today's world.

I thought it might interest those of you who have not read Jayne's book and provoke conversation about many of it's theories. I've included two excerpts from the treatise that I find provocative:
-----BumbleBeeBoogie
----------------------------------------------


Infinite Power from Conscious Dynamics

"A person could make an excellent bet by wagering a hundred ounces of gold that Julian Jaynes's book, The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind (Houghton Mifflin, 1976) will someday rank among the twenty most important books ever written. ...Jaynes's book signals the end of a 10,000-year reign of authoritarian institutions. His book also marks the beginning of a new era of individual consciousness during which people will increasingly act on the authority of their own brains. That movement toward self-responsibility will increasingly weaken the influences of external or mystical "authorities" such as government and religion."
------------

"Today the major worldwide sources of external "authority" are the philosophical doctrines of religion (along with the other forms of mysticism and "metaphysics") combined with political doctrines such as Socialism, Fascism, and Marxism. All such doctrines demand the surrender of the individual's ego (sense of self or "I") to a collective, obedient faith toward the "authority" of those doctrines. In return, those doctrines offer automatic answers and lifetime guidance from which faithful followers can survive without the responsibility or effort of using their own conscious minds. Thus, all current political systems represent a regression into mysticism -- from conscious man back to bicameral man.

Despite their constant harm to everyone, most modern-day external "authorities" and master neocheaters thrive by using the following two-step neocheating technique to repress consciousness and activate the bicameral mind in their victims.


First man is made to feel guilty. He is condemned for having lost his "innocence" by inventing consciousness. He is condemned for assuming the responsibility to use his own mind to guide his life. He is condemned for exchanging his automatic, bicameral life for a volitional, conscious life...condemned for exchanging his nature-given bicameral mind for a superior, man-invented conscious mind.

Then man is offered automatic solutions to problems and guidance through life -- is offered an "effortless" Garden of Eden or a utopian hereafter if he exchanges his own invented consciousness for faith in external "authority": bicameral faith in some leader, doctrine, or god. He is offered the "reward" of protection and the escape from the self-responsibility of making one's own decisions to guide one's own life. But for that "reward", he must renounce his own mind to follow someone else's mind or wishes disguised as "truths" promulgated by some external "authority" or higher power.

But, in reality, no valid external "authority" or higher power can exist or ever has existed. Valid authority evolves only from one's own independent, conscious mode of thinking. When that fact is fully realized, man will emerge completely from his bicameral past and move into a future that accepts individual consciousness as the only authority. ...Man will then fully evolve into a prosperous, happy individual who has assumed full responsibility for his own thinking and life.
Still, the resistance to self-responsibility is formidable. The bicameral mentality grips those seeking mysticism or other "authorities" for guidance. Those who accept external "authority" allow government officials, religious leaders, environmental and anti-abortion movements, faith, homilies, cliches, one-liners, slogans, the familiar, habits, and feelings to automatically guide their actions. The Neo-Tech Discovery demonstrates how throughout history billions of people because of their bicameral tendencies unnecessarily submit to the illusionary external "authorities" of parasitical Establishments, governments, and religions. Such submission is always done at a net loss to everyone's well being and happiness."

THE TREATISE SITE:

http://www.neo-tech.com/zonpower/chapter28.html
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 3,145 • Replies: 8
No top replies

 
anastasia
 
  1  
Reply Fri 16 May, 2003 09:54 am
so what is "bicameral"?
0 Replies
 
anastasia
 
  1  
Reply Fri 16 May, 2003 09:56 am
this does not help me:

bicameral

adj 1: composed of two legislative bodies [ant: unicameral] 2: consisting of two chambers; "the bicameral heart of a fish" [syn: two-chambered]

Source: WordNet ® 1.6, © 1997 Princeton University

<smiles>
0 Replies
 
BumbleBeeBoogie
 
  1  
Reply Fri 16 May, 2003 04:32 pm
reply to Anastasia
Anastasia, Assuming that you didn't read any of the link with the answer to your question, perhaps this will help:

"Dr. Jaynes discovered that until 3000 years ago essentially all human beings were void of consciousness.[ 83 ] Man along with all other primates functioned by mimicked or learned reactions. But, because of his much larger, more complex brain, man was able to develop a coherent language beginning about 8000 B.C. He was then guided by audio hallucinations. Those hallucinations evolved in the right hemisphere of the brain and were "heard" as communications or instructions in the left hemisphere of the brain (the bicameral or two-chamber mind). ...In effect, human beings were super-intelligent but automatically reacting animals who could communicate by talking. That communication enabled human beings to cooperate closely to build societies, even thriving civilizations."

-----BumbleBeeBoogie
0 Replies
 
anastasia
 
  1  
Reply Thu 20 Oct, 2005 01:56 am
<nods> thank you. <g>

I know I'm a little late, but I want you to know that I KNEW I'd be able to use this information sometime.

VERY interesting.

(But I still can't debate it - not knowlegable enough!)

Are you still contemplating the theories?
0 Replies
 
anastasia
 
  1  
Reply Thu 20 Oct, 2005 01:57 am
This is NOT a facetious question:

Do elephants have bicameral brains, dýa think?
0 Replies
 
BumbleBeeBoogie
 
  1  
Reply Thu 20 Oct, 2005 02:52 pm
Anastasia
anastasia wrote:
This is NOT a facetious question:
Do elephants have bicameral brains, dýa think?


Don't know, I could never get a pacaderm to tell me.

However, if you read the link you will find that evolution, not intelligent design, got rid of the bicameral brain in humans---with the possible exception of humans afflicted with schizophrenia. I've always wondered if a bicameral brain could be causing the voices they hear?

BBB
0 Replies
 
jstark
 
  1  
Reply Thu 20 Oct, 2005 04:58 pm
Who cites this work?
Your link is giving a 404 error.

I read this book about 10 years ago and what I remember most was a lot of stretched theories based mostly on the Greek mythological works such as the Iliad. He also uses the ancient concept that thinking took place in the heart as evidence that people were not conscious.

Also, I have not heard anyone else suggest this which makes me wounder as to how convincing his book really was.

Hmm.

I enjoyed reading it though.

Kind Regards
0 Replies
 
BumbleBeeBoogie
 
  1  
Reply Thu 20 Oct, 2005 11:23 pm
jstark
jstark, thanks for my link info. That's the problem with links. They sometimes go caflooie.

Re Jaynes theory, I found it a fascinating example of thinking outside the box. Doesn't mean I buy it 100% but it does answer some puzzling questions re evolution.

BBB
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

700 Inconsistencies in the Bible - Discussion by onevoice
Why do we deliberately fool ourselves? - Discussion by coincidence
Spirituality - Question by Miller
Oneness vs. Trinity - Discussion by Arella Mae
give you chills - Discussion by Bartikus
Evidence for Evolution! - Discussion by Bartikus
Evidence of God! - Discussion by Bartikus
One World Order?! - Discussion by Bartikus
God loves us all....!? - Discussion by Bartikus
The Preambles to Our States - Discussion by Charli
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Today's battle between the bicameral brain & conscious self
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 04/30/2024 at 09:21:22