The confusion is that Jaynes seems to be using the term 'consciousness' in two ways. He often loosely applies it to a broader awareness of an active self-identity that isn't limited to a specific kind of identity, as separate from basic perceptual awareness and biological reactivity. As such, one is 'unconscious' while driving without thought and without an intentional sense of self-control. But as part of his specific theory, 'consciousness' is often focused on the container metaphor of the egoic self, and this aspect personally interests me the most. In common usage, these two understandings of the same word are typically kept distinct; and so this is where confusion begins. Maybe people feel an intuititive impulse to push back against what could be seen as an unnecessary or unhelpful conflation, whether or not that assessment is accurate and fair. Because they lack the discernment to make a potentially worthy argument for that distinction, they instead dismiss Jaynes' theory whole cloth through misinterpretation and oversimplification. They get to the wrong start with the first step. We need clarification to determine if there is something of value to be unpacked. Bicameral humans still had a sense of self or selves and, as one could argue, might even have had a sense of active self-control. It's just that this self would've been non-egoic in that the self wouldn't have been personally contained but interpersonally shared. What held the self together, instead of the isolated individual body, was the communal space of a walled town or city-state with a shared visual center (temple, pillar, obelisk, etc). The whole communal identity of bundled mind was contained. Jaynes could've been partly incorrect in that the contained self maybe was developing much earlier in the Bronze Age, if the container was much larger and more broadly inclusive. The ego theory of mind hasn't necessarily been the only or first variation of a contained self. It's possible that it could also operate with a bundle theory of mind. As such, bicameral mentality could be taken as a transitional phase of more expansive containment between the amorphous uncontained animistic mind and the narrowly contained egoic mind. That is to say bicameral humans could've driven a wagon with or without awareness, just as modern humans drive cars with or without awareness. It's just that the driver when aware would've experienced the directing thought in the communal world, not in the body (skull, heart, etc). Rather than one possible driver, bicameral humans had access to multiple selves who could motivate and direct action. Each of those selves, though, could have other non-egoic forms of containment (songlines, megaliths, etc). This still fits in with Jaynes' overall theory, albeit modified slightly.

MT brougght me here ...(Michal Tsarion)

Actually EVERY month has 28 days

the split mind experiment with writing

I miss westworld series and shame on HBO too cancelled series and should’ve finished series too understand it … this video gave big clue in 2 versions and other version was Delores sitting down on chair holding gun

A footnote in "The Closing of the Western Mind" by Charles Freeman, led me to buy Jaynes' book, and has made me a devoted follower.

Fantastic!

❤ Fascinating!

Superb

Why are people wooing and cheering after everything said? Is all US TV like this?

Back in 1987 after a car accident I was recuperating from surgery in a Denver hospital with nothing to do but watch bad tv and thumb through old National Geographic magazines. One issue had two articles of interest: the cave art of Lascaux, and ancient Greek architecture. I read the latter first, wherein there was a drawing depicting the front of the Parthenon and describing how the ancient Athenians had discovered 'the golden mean' as the most aesthetically pleasing proportionality to the human eye, thus using it nearly anywhere they built anything. It is thus found so in Nature. (See pics showing The Golden Mean as an abstraction then, as employed for the front of the Pathenon). Later that day while delving into the Lascaux article they presented a photo identical to the one of a stag. And there in a corner of the stone wall at Lascaux was what looked like a Golden Rectangle. Within a day (and thanks to a very charming young British nurse) I was able to get a compass and protractor and druggist's ruler and measure both pictures and sure enough! The rectangle on the wall at Lascaux, which predates the Greek discovery by thousands of years, represented an accurate prehistoric depiction of the mathematically precise Golden Mean--and likewise in an 'artistic setting', so to speak.... ...The notion that a geometric object only observable subliminally in nature could find something resembling an epistemological yet unsymbolic basis as an archetype of the collective unconscious, across vast stretches of time and place, and that I would find evidence of it from unrelated articles in the same publication, was a startling experience...

We are all God who divided himself and are further divided between the left and the right. It is through uniting the left and the right and the re uniting of self that we reunite to God.

I read Jaynes in the late 70's. I was an undergraduate with an interest in philosophy and logic. I would invite anyone to re-read his introduction to what consciousness is not -- it still surprises me to this day. The next chapter, on metaphor, is the hardest idea, in my view, to understand. I wrote Jaynes asked more about mind space being the metaphor for real space. He was kind enough to respond to an eager undergraduate, but I have lost his reply! It is a delightful book.

One side of a piece of meat, talking to the other side of the piece of meat… And people don’t believe in miracles?

Wonderful. I was lucky enough to be there during this lecture. The part that still moves me the most is the dying out of the voice of god, the forgetting of the song of adonai without the support of the temple/priest system, etc. I wonder what modern culture "deafens" us to, and what states of consciousness we've simply forgotten altogether

David Duchovny, a fan of the book?! Looking at him in a whole new light there...

I read the book after hearing about it during the late 70's shortly after it was published. It changed the way I think about mankind and our human history. I have re-read it at least three times since and have learned more and more ,,a very important book, Should be required reading for ever High School student,

It's an interesting theory, but I can't believe it. I don't think it's possible for cities like Sumer or Akkad to have been planned and constructed by people who weren't fully conscious beings.

Thanks for this video. Keep up the good work.

Thanks for your work.

Thanks for again for fighting this often uphill battle and keeping the work alive and the research current 🙏🏻 and thanks to Hoel for his errors, as they have given a springboard for correction. -michaelangelo

Sometimes I wonder if the people who comment on Jaynes have ever actually read anything he wrote. It certainly doesn't seem that they have. Hoel clearly never bothered to read even the introduction to the origin of consciousness. What was it? Maybe 10 pages...

It baffles me how nearly every reference to Jaynes I've run across in various literatures can so badly misinterpret him. If a modern young child can't articulate the difference between a sensation, an intuition, his imaginings, and his propositional beliefs--and needs to be taught the language and use for such concepts--then certainly there was a period in human history before anyone was making such fine distinctions. My personal pet peeve is when Jaynes "seems racist" to people b/c the Spanish so easily defeated the natives. How bizarre that you can make a theory on how consciousness is NON-biological, but instead cultural, and still get accused of racism.

Thoughts on the idea bicameralism is a product of posture (shoulders up and forward/chin up/tailbone up and back; sleeping on chin/ribcage/knees rather than back) and consciousness being a product of calories?

This!

People who think this theory disproves the existence of the spiritual realm/proves materialism are a good example of the Dunning-Kruger effect

Wow He changed a Lot physically from when He was young

This guy is so correct and indeed conscious is 100% a constructed phenomena, which permits us to be 'introspective' as Marcel points out - which of course other animals appear not to have. The question I have is that are we now in an electronic environment whereby we are returning to a bicameral mind? I say we are bc of social media and the demise of individualized consciousness.

I listen to a woman scream at her baby of around 11 months every time the partner is away. Police were called on several occasions but they didnt care or assumed what they were doing was normal. Ff to a few days ago child is 4 screams just like the mother except now the mother screams more than the child. I knock the door its open the mother appears and becomes this whimpering concerned woman who fears her daughter has broken her nose. Amidst all of this I ask the child if she had a good day at school she stops crying and a joyful yes and beginning clapping then goes back to crying. I tell the mother to stop whimpering as she is the cause her irrational emotions are making the child react and believe this is normal behaviour. She started shouting at the child and I asked her to stop abusing her. She was horrified being accused of abuse when I said verbal abuse she shut up mouth aghast she looked as though she heard verbal abuse for the first time...she was silent and the child told her to go away. The next neighbour came out to enquire she is a young woman too. Scratch Mark's on her chest. I asked the mother to seek help for her anger issues she closed the door. The other neighour now. I enquired about the scratch scars and she confirmed it was a fight. I'm asking...though consciousness appears to be a small part of it all is that because the power to self control through shock realisation also forces one to be aware of that within and without like a profound connection on the inside but the outside world remains the same?

Thank you for starting this society!

I read this book 10 years ago and in 2023 it is in my bones! Phenomenal piece of work exciting!!!

Dumbest, most disproven theory ever. That’s why no one‘s ever heard of it.

Neuro-linguistic programming seems derived from Jaynes's work.

Jaynes's theory seems to overlap a lot with the theory of neuro-linguistic programming., NLP. Any thoughts?

Audio halluncinations seem tied with vivid dreams and even self talk and active imagination. Also consider hearing songs played or repeated audio commercials and how these create inner recordings that are hard to silence.

Duchovny never seems fully quite conscious

Great discussion 🌊🏄‍♂️🌵☀️

The silence after he explained..got some people thinking.

I heard of Julian Jaynes via William S. Burroughs.

Beast was reading this book in Uncanny X-Men 134 in 1980. Those comics were so good. Today, they are not. I think the movies from Disney are designed to confuse you and to make you stupid. They get Natural Law wrong in Dr. Strange, and they misquote Orwell in Spider-Man. I think the writers at Disney get it wrong on purpose because they push CIA propaganda for their main source of income. They don't profit much from the comics.

Join the Julian Jaynes Society to watch many lectures on Jaynes's theory, including lectures by and interviews with Julian Jaynes: www.julianjaynes.org/join/ Read our latest book, "Conversations on Consciousness and the Bicameral Mind," which answers all of the most common questions about Jaynes's theory, explains the latest evidence, and extends the theory into many new areas: www.amazon.com/gp/product/1737305534/

Join the Julian Jaynes Society to watch many lectures on Jaynes's theory, including lectures by and interviews with Julian Jaynes: www.julianjaynes.org/join/ Read our latest book, "Conversations on Consciousness and the Bicameral Mind," which answers all of the most common questions about Jaynes's theory, explains the latest evidence, and extends the theory into many new areas: www.amazon.com/gp/product/1737305534/

Join the Julian Jaynes Society to watch many lectures on Jaynes's theory, including lectures by and interviews with Julian Jaynes: www.julianjaynes.org/join/ Read our latest book, "Conversations on Consciousness and the Bicameral Mind," which answers all of the most common questions about Jaynes's theory, explains the latest evidence, and extends the theory into many new areas: www.amazon.com/gp/product/1737305534/

Join the Julian Jaynes Society to watch many lectures on Jaynes's theory, including lectures by and interviews with Julian Jaynes: www.julianjaynes.org/join/ Read our latest book, "Conversations on Consciousness and the Bicameral Mind," which answers all of the most common questions about Jaynes's theory, explains the latest evidence, and extends the theory into many new areas: www.amazon.com/gp/product/1737305534/

Join the Julian Jaynes Society to watch many lectures on Jaynes's theory, including lectures by and interviews with Julian Jaynes: www.julianjaynes.org/join/ Read our latest book, "Conversations on Consciousness and the Bicameral Mind," which answers all of the most common questions about Jaynes's theory, explains the latest evidence, and extends the theory into many new areas: www.amazon.com/gp/product/1737305534/

Join the Julian Jaynes Society to watch many lectures on Jaynes's theory, including lectures by and interviews with Julian Jaynes: www.julianjaynes.org/join/ Read our latest book, "Conversations on Consciousness and the Bicameral Mind," which answers all of the most common questions about Jaynes's theory, explains the latest evidence, and extends the theory into many new areas: www.amazon.com/gp/product/1737305534/

Join the Julian Jaynes Society to watch many lectures on Jaynes's theory, including lectures by and interviews with Julian Jaynes: www.julianjaynes.org/join/ Read our latest book, "Conversations on Consciousness and the Bicameral Mind," which answers all of the most common questions about Jaynes's theory, explains the latest evidence, and extends the theory into many new areas: www.amazon.com/gp/product/1737305534/

Join the Julian Jaynes Society to watch many lectures on Jaynes's theory, including lectures by and interviews with Julian Jaynes: www.julianjaynes.org/join/ Read our latest book, "Conversations on Consciousness and the Bicameral Mind," which answers all of the most common questions about Jaynes's theory, explains the latest evidence, and extends the theory into many new areas: www.amazon.com/gp/product/1737305534/

Join the Julian Jaynes Society to watch many lectures on Jaynes's theory, including lectures by and interviews with Julian Jaynes: www.julianjaynes.org/join/ Read our latest book, "Conversations on Consciousness and the Bicameral Mind," which answers all of the most common questions about Jaynes's theory, explains the latest evidence, and extends the theory into many new areas: www.amazon.com/gp/product/1737305534/