Consciousness and the Bicameral Mind – The Julian Jaynes Society Podcast

The Myth of “Pure Consciousness” - The Belief in a Fundamental Psychic Process Hinders Progress in Psychology

By Brian J. McVeigh

Read by Michael R. Jacobs (⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://www.theungoogleable.com⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠, ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://www.youtube.com/@VoidDenizen⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠).

“If understanding a thing is arriving at a familiarizing metaphor for it, then we can see that there always will be a difficulty in understanding consciousness. For it should be immediately apparent that there is not and cannot be anything in our immediate experience that is like immediate experience itself. There is therefore a sense in which we shall never be able to understand consciousness in the same way that we can understand things that we are conscious of”  (Julian Jaynes, 1976, p. 53).

I have often wondered why so many well-credentialed researchers continue to bark up the wrong tree in their quest to understand consciousness. Many reasons could be offered, but in a recent discussion on the “Julian Jaynes — The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind” Facebook page someone brought up Jaynes’s aforementioned quote. ...

Read the complete text from this episode here:

https://www.julianjaynes.org/2022/10/18/the-myth-of-pure-consciousness/

Learn more about Julian Jaynes's theory or become a member by visiting the Julian Jaynes Society at ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://www.julianjaynes.org⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠.

A Resurgence of Julian Jaynes’ Theory of Consciousness

By Peter Sellick

Read by Michael R. Jacobs (⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://www.theungoogleable.com⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠, ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://www.youtube.com/@VoidDenizen⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠).

Adam Mars-Jones begins his review of Alvaro Enrigue’s “You Dreamed of Empires” (London Review of Books, Volume 46, Number 10) with the following:

“Culture shock​ seems too mild a phrase to describe the arrival of Europeans in South and Central America. In his 1976 maverick classic, The Origin of consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind (its category speculative neurohistory, at a guess), Julian Jaynes proposes that, at the time Pizarro and his men reached them, the Inca didn’t have full mental autonomy but only ‘protosubjectivity’. They functioned largely by a sort of automatism, acting according to unchanging patterns and ritual clues, able to absorb only slight disruptions to their routines, so that this was less a clash of civilisations than of mental structures.”

This sent me scrambling for my old copy of Jaynes’ monumental book that I read in the late 80s.

Read the complete text from this episode here:

https://www.julianjaynes.org/2024/08/16/a-resurgence-of-julian-jaynes-theory-of-consciousness/

Learn more about Julian Jaynes's theory or become a member by visiting the Julian Jaynes Society at ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://www.julianjaynes.org⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠.

Julian Jaynes Is Not for the Intellectually Fainthearted — But Breaking Jaynesian Psychology Down into Four Hypotheses Makes Things Easier

By Brian J. McVeigh

Read by Michael R. Jacobs (⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://www.theungoogleable.com⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠, ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://www.youtube.com/@VoidDenizen⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠).

I first encountered Julian Jaynes’s The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind almost 45 years ago. Though the book made sense to me, I could see why people would reject its arguments. Nevertheless I assumed that once carefully explained, people may not agree but would at least be able to discern a certain logic behind Jaynesian psychology. How naïve I was.

Read the complete text from this episode here:

https://www.julianjaynes.org/2022/06/07/julian-jaynes-is-not-for-the-intellectually-fainthearted/

Learn more about Julian Jaynes's theory or become a member by visiting the Julian Jaynes Society at ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://www.julianjaynes.org⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠.

The Need to Acknowledge Bicameral Vestiges: Jaynesian Psychology Finds Support not just from the Ancient World

By Brian J. McVeigh

Read by Michael R. Jacobs (⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://www.theungoogleable.com⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠, ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://www.youtube.com/@VoidDenizen⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠).

This post is inspired by a recent exchange I had with a commentator who saw little value in relying on biblical accounts as evidence to support Jaynes’s theories because they were “fairytales.” Presumably such a criticism could be extended to other writings that constitute humanity’s extensive religious tradition. It is worth responding to this line of critique because it is not an uncommon reaction from those who find fault with Jaynes (and for what it’s worth, Jaynes did not set out to explain the origins of religion; his research was on the origin of consciousness).

Read the complete text from this episode here:

https://www.julianjaynes.org/2022/04/26/the-need-to-acknowledge-bicameral-vestiges/

Learn more about Julian Jaynes's theory or become a member by visiting the Julian Jaynes Society at ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://www.julianjaynes.org⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠.

Disentangling Inner Speech, Self-dialogue, and Auditory Hallucinations: The Mind Is a Machine for Sociopsychological Communication

By Brian J. McVeigh

Read by Michael R. Jacobs (⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://www.theungoogleable.com⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠, ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://www.youtube.com/@VoidDenizen⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠).

How are inner speech, self-dialogue, auditory imagery, and hallucinations related? And what exactly are hallucinations? Some have suggested that hallucinations are caused by a monitoring defect in inner speech (also termed inner voice, silent speech, subvocal speech, covert speech, self talk, internal monologue, verbal thought, etc.) (Fernyhough, The Voices Within, 2016). Such a claim, however, ignores the overwhelming evidence concerning hallucinations before about 1000 BCE. Any theoretical linkage must take into account one crucial datum: hallucinations were central to normal sociopsychological functioning. Hallucinations, which were ubiquitous in the ancient world, were a mechanism for social control (until about the first millennium BCE). The “monitoring defect” hypothesis confuses matters: Rather than hallucinations resulting from a problem with inner speech, inner speech is a type of watered-down hallucination. This is why, arguably, for some an inner voice possesses agent-like properties or is accompanied by a felt presence, suggesting vestigial bicameral mentality.

Read the complete text from this episode here:

https://www.julianjaynes.org/2021/10/26/disentangling-inner-speech-self-dialogue-and-auditory-hallucinations/

Learn more about Julian Jaynes's theory or become a member by visiting the Julian Jaynes Society at ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://www.julianjaynes.org⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠.

Consciousness, Cognition, and Free Will: A Jaynesian Perspective

An Interview by Vinay Kolhatkar with Julian Jaynes Society Founder and Executive Director Marcel Kuijsten.

Marcel Kuijsten discusses the uniquely human consciousness from a Jaynesian perspective with the show's host, Vinay Kolhatkar. Also covered are free will and cognition, the cognitive explosion of Ancient Greece, pre-conceptual ancient cultures prevalent today, the human disposition to obeying authorial voices, and the enormous canvas for future research.

Courtesy of the Savvy Street Show (https://www.thesavvystreet.com/).

Watch the video here: https://youtu.be/tAE5WL5XvDQ

Learn more about Julian Jaynes's theory or become a member by visiting the Julian Jaynes Society at ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠www.julianjaynes.org⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠.

History, Not Evolution, Is the Key Variable for Understanding Consciousness: The Temporal Extension Thesis and the Adaptive Psyche By Brian J. McVeigh

Read by Michael R. Jacobs (⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠www.theungoogleable.com⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠, ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠www.youtube.com/@VoidDenizen⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠).

The human mind is always adjusting, accommodating, and adopting resources from outside itself to expand and improve its capabilities. Such adaptation, if broadly understood, unfolds across different temporal spans. But a glaring weakness of mainstream research psychology is its almost complete neglect of a time-scale that would illuminate how the human mind changes over a few generations or several centuries.

Read the complete text from this episode here:

https://www.julianjaynes.org/2021/09/15/history-not-evolution-key-variable-for-understanding-consciousness/

Learn more about Julian Jaynes's theory or become a member by visiting the Julian Jaynes Society at ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠www.julianjaynes.org⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠.

Has Human Mentality Changed?

Part 2: Cognitive Relativism and Jaynesian Psychology

By Brian J. McVeigh

Read by Michael R. Jacobs (⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠www.theungoogleable.com⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠, ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠www.youtube.com/@VoidDenizen⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠).

In Part 1 of “Has Human Mentality Changed?” I discussed how the contributions of Julian Jaynes bolster a radical neuroplastic understanding of the mind, especially if the crucial role of the cultural acquisitions of adaptive cognitive capabilities are incorporated into the analysis of historical changes in psychology, i.e., a neurocultural perspective. Here I want to explore some of the implications of psychic diversity. Three different perspectives illustrate well the significance of psychic plasticity. Though my present discussion is about psychic plasticity as an enculturating (extra-genetic) process, neurophysiological changes cannot be ignored (thus, “neurocultural”).

Read the complete text from this episode here:

https://www.julianjaynes.org/blog/julian-jaynes-theory/has-human-mentality-changed-part-2/

Learn more about Julian Jaynes's theory or become a member by visiting the Julian Jaynes Society at ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠www.julianjaynes.org⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠.

Has Human Mentality Changed?

Part 1: Neuroplasticity and Jaynesian Psychology

By Brian J. McVeigh

Read by Michael R. Jacobs (⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠www.theungoogleable.com⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠, ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠www.youtube.com/@VoidDenizen⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠).

The media and scientific journals give much attention to “neuroplasticity” (the brain’s innate ability to form and reorganize synaptic connections in response to learning or injury), “neurodiversity” (variations in the brain regarding sociability, learning, attention, mood, and other various mental functions), “neurotypical,” and “neuroatypical.” From an intellectual historical perspective these terms elicit interest because they call into question, at least in a very general sense, what has been a foundational concept of the social sciences: Psychic unity. Introduced by the anthropologist Adolf Bastian (1826‒1905), psychic unity was further conceptualized early in the twentieth century as an intellectual assault on racism by enlightened, well-meaning, anthropologists. Psychic unity is a universalist idea postulating that that human mentality is more or less the same everywhere; it challenged the previously dominant view of social Darwinism that viewed societies climbing a ladder of civilizational progress. At the top were late-nineteenth century industrially-advanced societies whose technological prowess was assumed to grant them superiority. In the case of northern European and American powers, it was assumed that their “white,” Christian identity explained their success (though Japan, which was not far behind the Euro-American sphere in terms of “progress,” obviously did not rely on white racialism and Christianity to account for its achievements). It was thought that less successful societies had not acquired the cognitive capabilities to compete with those higher up the ladder of civilization. The premises of psychic unity are still prevalent among not a few psychologists and configures assumptions that restrict research, despite recent interest in neuroplasticity and neurodiversity.

Read the complete text from this episode here:

https://www.julianjaynes.org/blog/julian-jaynes-theory/has-human-mentality-changed-part-1/

Learn more about Julian Jaynes's theory or become a member by visiting the Julian Jaynes Society at ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠www.julianjaynes.org⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠.

Putting Julian Jaynes’s Theory to the Test

Jaynes’s Theorizings, Like All Great Systems of Thought, Require Hypotheses-testing and Experimentation to Be Substantiated

By Brian J. McVeigh

Read by Michael R. Jacobs (⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠www.theungoogleable.com⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠, ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠www.youtube.com/@VoidDenizen⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠).

It is easy to forget that the Newtonian, Darwinian, and Einsteinian intellectual edifices were built over many years, painstakingly solidified brick by brick through batteries of well-designed experiments and careful analyses. Science is the sturdy house that such patient construction continually erects.

Consider the work of Julian Jaynes. Over the years I have heard many dismissively say “it’s an interesting theory but it can’t be proven.” Such remarks demonstrate a misunderstanding of the nature of scientific progress as well as what is needed to come to terms with Jaynesian theorizing. The contributions of Jaynes constitute an entire paradigm that reaches far beyond psychology. It is a constellation of bold, innovative ideas with far-ranging implications and great breadth that sheds new light on neurology, history, religious studies, psychotherapeutics, archaeology, linguistics, philosophy, literature, and other arts. So what is needed, then, is a breaking down of Jaynes’s core theories into numerous propositions, postulations, and hypotheses appropriate to different disciplines and fields of expertise. That way his claims can be systematically tested. That is a tall order and demands the contributions of a legion of specialists.

Read the complete text from this episode here:

https://www.julianjaynes.org/blog/julian-jaynes-theory/putting-julian-jaynes-theory-to-the-test/

Learn more about Julian Jaynes's theory or become a member by visiting the Julian Jaynes Society at ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠www.julianjaynes.org⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠.

Fact Checking Scott Alexander’s Discussion of Julian Jaynes’s Theory on “Slate Star Codex”

By Marcel Kuijsten

Read by Michael R. Jacobs (⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠www.theungoogleable.com⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠, ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠www.youtube.com/@VoidDenizen⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠).

In June 2020, the psychiatrist and blogger Scott Alexander wrote a review of Julian Jaynes’s The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind for his popular “Slate Star Codex” blog. His discussion of Jaynes’s theory contains a number of misconceptions and errors, and I will attempt to clear those up here. While the first three sections of his review are more or less just a summary of Jaynes’s main arguments and some topics he feels are related or supportive, the issues I’d like to address can be found in the fourth and fifth sections of his post.

Read the complete text from this episode here:

https://www.julianjaynes.org/blog/fact-checks/fact-checking-scott-alexander-part2/

Learn more about Julian Jaynes's theory or become a member by visiting the Julian Jaynes Society at ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠www.julianjaynes.org⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠.

Conscious Interiority Is a Constellation of Processes

But Attention-grabbing Headlines in the Scientific Literature Mistakenly Suggest that Consciousness is an All-purpose Psychological Stuff

By Brian J. McVeigh

Read by Michael R. Jacobs (⁠⁠⁠⁠www.theungoogleable.com⁠⁠⁠⁠, ⁠⁠⁠⁠www.youtube.com/@VoidDenizen⁠⁠⁠⁠).

Pretend you’re from another dimension and unfamiliar with cars, planes, trains, and ships. But you quickly notice what they share in common: Motion. You’re interested in discovering exactly how these contraptions work and decide that to understand them you need to investigate motion-ness. So you begin to take them apart, piece by piece, looking for the essence of movement. However, try as you might, you can’t discover the mysterious potency animating the operation of going from point A to point B. But you’re absolutely convinced that motion-ness must exist somewhere in or around anything imbued with the power of mobility.  

Read the complete text from this episode here:

https://www.julianjaynes.org/blog/julian-jaynes-theory/conscious-interiority-is-a-constellation-of-processes/

Learn more about Julian Jaynes's theory or become a member by visiting the Julian Jaynes Society at ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠www.julianjaynes.org⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠.

Conscious Interiority and the Language Trap

Why We Struggle to Explain Consciousness

By Brian J. McVeigh

Read by Michael R. Jacobs (⁠⁠⁠www.theungoogleable.com⁠⁠⁠, ⁠⁠⁠www.youtube.com/@VoidDenizen⁠⁠⁠).

Cleaning up the mess surrounding the uses of “consciousness” is not an airy, abstruse, or esoteric subject, a topic only for absent-minded academics with their heads in the clouds. This discussion has serious, profound, and practical implications. Neuroscientists employ terminology to delineate the differences between being asleep, in a coma, or in a state of ordinary consciously interiorized mentation. Physicians, psychiatrists, psychotherapists, counselors, and other mental health care providers need to be able to differentiate various forms of cognition to facilitate healing.

Read the complete text from this episode here:

https://www.julianjaynes.org/blog/julian-jaynes-theory/conscious-interiority-and-the-language-trap/

Learn more about Julian Jaynes's theory or become a member by visiting the Julian Jaynes Society at ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠www.julianjaynes.org⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠.

A Relay-Race Model of Conscious Interiority

A Cultural Invention, Consciousness Needs to Be Relearned with Each Generation

By Brian J. McVeigh

Read by Michael R. Jacobs (⁠⁠www.theungoogleable.com⁠⁠, ⁠⁠www.youtube.com/@VoidDenizen⁠⁠).

The word “consciousness” usually evokes something neuroanatomical, intimately bound up with perceptual experiences, an evolutionary psychological feature from our very distant past that is inherent to the brain itself. Consciousness for many seems to be a general term for any type of sensory, conceptual, or thinking process. This leads to muddled theorizing.

Read the complete text from this episode here:

https://www.julianjaynes.org/blog/julian-jaynes-theory/a-relay-race-model-of-conscious-interiority/

Learn more about Julian Jaynes's theory or become a member by visiting the Julian Jaynes Society at ⁠⁠⁠⁠www.julianjaynes.org⁠⁠⁠⁠.

Consciousness Is a Cultural Add-on

A Product of History Not Reducible to Neurology, Conscious Interiority Is Like Mathematics

By Brian J. McVeigh

Read by Michael R. Jacobs (⁠www.theungoogleable.com⁠, ⁠www.youtube.com/@VoidDenizen⁠).

When we hear the word “consciousness” many of us, in a knee-jerk manner, associate it with neuroanatomy, neurophysiology, or something physically inborn. We also link it to perceptual or cognitive processes that are non-historical and non-cultural. However, according to Jaynesian psychology, these are all misleading assumptions, since consciousness is not necessary for perception, learning, and reasoning. It is extra-genetic and a product of sociocultural forces and it entered the historical scene relatively recently, about three millennia ago. Indeed, as a culturally-configured form of knowledge, consciousness is closer to mathematics or other domains of learning. Consciousness is a very special form of knowledge, of course, but an array of socially-acquired ideas nevertheless. Let’s consider how mathematics is similar to consciousness.

Read the complete text from this episode here:

https://www.julianjaynes.org/blog/julian-jaynes-theory/consciousness-is-a-cultural-add-on/

Learn more about Julian Jaynes's theory or become a member by visiting the Julian Jaynes Society at ⁠⁠⁠www.julianjaynes.org⁠⁠⁠.

Jaynesian Therapeutics and the Self-healing Mind: Part 2

Lessons from Hallucinations, Hypnosis, and Meditation

By Brian J. McVeigh

Read by Michael R. Jacobs (www.theungoogleable.com, www.youtube.com/@VoidDenizen).

In Part 1 we looked at how something we take for granted — consciousness — is actually an active ingredient that can aid in the repair of the mind for certain mental disorders. In this Part we explore how anomalous psychological experiences hold lessons for how consciousness relates to the self-healing mind. Various manifestations of mentality — ordinary consciousness, hallucinations, hypnosis, meditation — are like a colorful tapestry with different patterns but woven together with the same threads. The challenge is disentangling and isolating the threads so as to understand the psychological processes behind these phenomena, especially since this can help understand the therapeutic benefits of certain mental exercises.

Read the complete text from this episode here:

https://www.julianjaynes.org/blog/julian-jaynes-theory/jaynesian-therapeutics-and-the-self-healing-mind-part-2-of-2/

Learn more about Julian Jaynes's theory or become a member by visiting the Julian Jaynes Society at ⁠⁠www.julianjaynes.org⁠⁠.

Jaynesian Therapeutics and the Self-healing Mind: Part 1

Harnessing the Active Ingredients of Psychotherapy

By Brian J. McVeigh

Read by Michael R. Jacobs (www.theungoogleable.com). His YouTube channel is www.youtube.com/@VoidDenizen.

It is an interesting fact that the success rates for different psychotherapies are about the same. This is why researchers have searched for “common factors” that facilitate the healing process. The goal, then, should be to discover the common “active ingredients” of all therapies, e.g., the personality of the therapist, the “therapeutic alliance.” Could consciousness itself constitute a common factor that can be cultivated in order to repair troubled minds? Could consciousness underlie the effectiveness of the self-healing mind?

Read the complete text from this episode here:

https://www.julianjaynes.org/blog/julian-jaynes-theory/jaynesian-therapeutics-and-the-self-healing-mind-part-1-of-2/

Learn more about Julian Jaynes's theory or become a member by visiting the Julian Jaynes Society at ⁠www.julianjaynes.org⁠.

Appreciating Other Facets of Jaynesian Psychology: Part 2

By Brian J. McVeigh

In Part 1 of “Appreciating Other Facets of Jaynesian Psychology” I began a discussion of aspects of Jaynesian psychology that if appreciated, add depth and perhaps persuasiveness to Jaynes’s arguments. I focused on how understanding Jaynes investigation of how language has constructed conscious interiority. Here I introduce some more facets of Jaynesian psychology. I suggest that given the richness and breadth of Jaynes’s thinking, we need to propose a “Jaynesian intellectual paradigm” that goes beyond mere psychological theorizing.

Read the complete text from this episode here:

https://www.julianjaynes.org/blog/julian-jaynes-theory/appreciating-other-facets-of-jaynesian-psychology-part-2/

Learn more about Julian Jaynes's theory or become a member by visiting the Julian Jaynes Society at www.julianjaynes.org.

Appreciating Other Facets of Jaynesian Psychology: Part 1

By Brian J. McVeigh

Jaynesian psychology can be distilled down to two major claims. First, until about three millennia ago individual behavior was governed by a different neurocultural arrangement called bicameral mentality: the right hemisphere generated audiovisual hallucinations interpreted as supernatural visitations (ancestors, chiefs, gods) that governed the left hemisphere (the “mortal” side). But bicameral mentality was no match for social transformations — expanding demographics, more complex political economic systems, mass migration, and technological innovations such as writing and bronze and ironworking.  This brings us to Jaynes’s second claim. What he called consciousness, or subjective introspectable self-awareness, replaced bicameral mentality. This cognitive upgrade was a cultural invention, not a bioevolutionary development.

Like crowning towers built upon lower tiers and structures, Jaynes’s two claims rest on a number of interlocking theories that deserve attention. This is because unfortunately, reviewers, commentators, and critics often fail to see the subtlety of Jaynes’s arguments. Even critiques that are sympathetic to Jaynes’s claims often miss the nuances and richness of his theorizing, so it is worth exploring some of the chambers making up Jaynes’s intellectual edifice.

Read the complete text from this episode here:

https://www.julianjaynes.org/blog/julian-jaynes-theory/appreciating-other-facets-of-jaynesian-psychology-part-1/

Learn more about Julian Jaynes's theory or become a member by visiting the Julian Jaynes Society at ⁠⁠⁠https://www.julianjaynes.org⁠⁠⁠​.

Fact Checking Erik Hoel’s Comments on Julian Jaynes's Theory in "The World Behind the World: Consciousness, Free Will, and the Limits of Science."

A brief discussion between Marcel Kuijsten and Brian J. McVeigh, fact checking Erik Hoel's recent comments on Julian Jaynes's theory in his book "The World Behind the World: Consciousness, Free Will, and the Limits of Science."

They discuss a number of different problems with Erik Hoel's understanding of Julian Jaynes's theory. They also explain the critique of Jaynes's theory raised by Hoel (and originally made by Ned Block) referred to as the "use/mention error," and how that critique was later addressed by Julian Jaynes, Daniel Dennett, and Jan Sleutels.

Read the blog post: https://www.julianjaynes.org/blog/fact-checks/fact-checking-erik-hoel/

Learn more about Julian Jaynes's theory or become a member by visiting the Julian Jaynes Society at ⁠⁠⁠https://www.julianjaynes.org⁠⁠⁠​.

References from the video:

Brian J. McVeigh, "Fact Checking Erik Hoel’s “The World Behind the World: Consciousness, Free Will, and the Limits of Science,” August 6, 2023. (https://www.julianjaynes.org/blog/fact-checks/fact-checking-erik-hoel/)

Julian Jaynes, "Afterword," in Julian Jaynes, "The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind" (Mariner Books, 1976/1990). (https://www.amazon.com/Origin-Consciousness-Breakdown-Bicameral-Mind/dp/0618057072/)

Jan Sleutels, "Greek Zombies: On the Alleged Absurdity of Substantially Unconscious Greek Minds," in Marcel Kuijsten (ed.) "Reflections on the Dawn of Consciousness: Julian Jaynes’s Bicameral Mind Theory Revisited" (Julian Jaynes Society, 2006). (https://www.julianjaynes.org/book/reflections-on-the-dawn-of-consciousness/)

Daniel Dennett, "Julian Jaynes’ Software Archeology," Canadian Psychology, 1986, 27, 2, 149-154. (https://www.julianjaynes.org/resources/articles/julian-jaynes-software-archeology/)

Marcel Kuijsten (ed.), "Conversations on Consciousness and the Bicameral Mind: Interviews with Leading Thinkers on Julian Jaynes’s Theory" (Julian Jaynes Society, 2022). (https://www.julianjaynes.org/book/conversations-on-consciousness-and-the-bicameral-mind/)