Julian Jaynes presents us an extremely intriguing hypothesis about how our consciousness arose as a consequence of the disappearance of a language centre in the right-side hemisphere of the brain. Normally our language understanding and speaking abilities are exclusively located in the left hemisphere of the brain. In ancient times however a second language centre may have been present in the right hemisphere, giving rise to a so-called "bicameral mind". This vestigial language centre may still be active in schizophrenic and psychotic patients who hear voices -often with a religious connotation.
On the basis of an extensive study in historical texts and archaeological material, Jaynes shows us that hearing voices would appear to have been much more common in the pre-Homeric times. People heard the Gods speaking to and through them in an authoritative manner telling them what to do. This avoided the need for consciousness in the sense of egoic awareness as we know it. There was no need to evaluate for yourself what needed to be done.
Citing various sources from Greek, Babylonian and Hebrew sources, Jaynes provides convincing arguments to support his thesis. Not that Jaynes considers that Gods actually spoke to these people. Rather, these voices were hallucinated.
As the complexity of society increased and different people started to express contradictory mutually exclusive orders from the Gods or the Muses, this modus operandi became untenable. In addition less people were having this ability.
This is where a self-directing principle was born which became the language dependent egoic awareness we usually know as consciousness.
Jaynes argues that consciousness involves a spatialization of temporal events; we can mentally visit our memories; the ability of excerption (abstraction/filtering), having a self-image called the "analog I", with which we can run virtual scenarios to probe our future actions, a "metaphor me" to reflect on ourselves and the ability of narratization, to link our past to our present and future and to classify and identify events around us in abstracted mental pictures. Finally, Jaynes considers the ability to conform perceived situations to learned ones or the ability to assimilate in a conscious manner as "conciliation", a further aspect of consciousness. It is these abilities that distinguish the present day human from its pre-Illiadic ancestors.
The book is very rich in metaphors, anecdotes and illustrations, providing a comprehensive descriptive ontology and a historical framework for his thesis.
Most interesting I found the relevance of these notions for present day mental pathologies, but also its value in topics like hypnosis and poetry.
Especially the authoritative nature of the God-voice described in the ancient scriptures seems to be well in accordance with the compelling nature of the voices psychiatric people hear, forcing them to engage in actions against their (left-hemisphere) will.
As there is also ample evidence that in patients who had the bridge between left- and right-hemisphere severed actually two personalities appear to be living who don't know what is going on in the other half, a strong case is made to support Jaynes' theory.
It is my speculation that it may well be that religion finds its origin in the activity of the right-hemisphere vestigial language centre and that hearing God, and being convinced of God, is actually the result of hearing or feeling the presence of your second self.
I'd also like to speculate that it may be unsurprising that the right hemisphere speaks with such an authoritative voice, giving the fact that it is mostly locked -up and not heard. Is our second self a mute prisoner, who when it gets the chance of being heard asserts itself firmly?
Finally, I figure that the attraction to religion may also have its roots in an atavistic tendency based on a genetic memory to return to the times of the paradise in which we did not need to take decisions for ourselves. The tale of the expulsion of Adam and Eve from the paradise itself might be an allegory of the loss of the bicameral mind.
Wholeheartedly recommended for its excellent unorthodox nature and its solid corroboration.
