I discussed in my first post about the subconscious and the conscious mind. Here is a theory on their function,which was quite popular back in the 70s, and a lot of its propositions were considered refreshing and thought-provoking and right and some still are considered so.
Here goes the theory of the Bicameral Mind by Julian Jaynes:
The bicameral mentality would be non-conscious in its inability to reason and articulate about mental contents through meta-reflection, reacting without explicitly realizing and without the meta-reflective ability to give an account of why one did so. The bicameral mind would thus lack metaconsciousness, autobiographical memory and the capacity for executive "ego functions" such as deliberate mind-wandering and conscious introspection of mental content. When Bicamerality as a method of social control was no longer adaptive in complex civilizations, this mental model was replaced by the conscious mode of thought which, Jaynes argued, is grounded in the acquisition of metaphorical language learned by exposure to narrative practice.
Now this is only a small excerpt from the whole theory,but I only wanted to talk about what the function of the subconscious and the conscious mind might be and how they are related.
Also, there arises a question in my mind:
So, according to Julian Jaynes, because of the increasing complexity of new burgeoning civilisations, the Bicameral model was replaced with the Conscious model, and this model is grounded in the acquisition of metaphorical language learned by exposure to narrative practice. Thus, does it mean that those not good enough at the expression of metaphorical language retain the Bicameral model to some extent, and that is the, maybe, primary model of thinking for them?
Here goes the theory of the Bicameral Mind by Julian Jaynes:
The bicameral mentality would be non-conscious in its inability to reason and articulate about mental contents through meta-reflection, reacting without explicitly realizing and without the meta-reflective ability to give an account of why one did so. The bicameral mind would thus lack metaconsciousness, autobiographical memory and the capacity for executive "ego functions" such as deliberate mind-wandering and conscious introspection of mental content. When Bicamerality as a method of social control was no longer adaptive in complex civilizations, this mental model was replaced by the conscious mode of thought which, Jaynes argued, is grounded in the acquisition of metaphorical language learned by exposure to narrative practice.
Now this is only a small excerpt from the whole theory,but I only wanted to talk about what the function of the subconscious and the conscious mind might be and how they are related.
Also, there arises a question in my mind:
So, according to Julian Jaynes, because of the increasing complexity of new burgeoning civilisations, the Bicameral model was replaced with the Conscious model, and this model is grounded in the acquisition of metaphorical language learned by exposure to narrative practice. Thus, does it mean that those not good enough at the expression of metaphorical language retain the Bicameral model to some extent, and that is the, maybe, primary model of thinking for them?
No comments:
Post a Comment