Enormous redpill >The Origin of Conscious.... >published

File: IMG_20170609_103749.jpg (108KB, 960x504px) Image search: [Google]

108KB, 960x504px

Go on

>>129364164
Not sure about pills or whatever but certainly interesting.

Worth the Wiki read at a minimum.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bicameralism_(psychology)

>>129364855
Julian Jaynes provides a scientific basis for God and explains what it means outside of traditional religion. This book shows that religions as a whole develop to control both parts of the mind, the divine and natural. By eliminating a belief in God, no balance of mind can be reached and people are essentially zombies. Zacharya was used to maintain the ridiculous irreconcilable beliefs they use to control.

>>129365150
see
>>129365153

>>129364164
>julian jaynes
>hurrdurr everybody became conscious 3000 years ago
>some miracle coordinated this change across the globe and between people having no contavt with each other
>coordinated so perfectly that we haven't found a single isolated tribe without consciousness

jaynes is just another velikovsky. into the trash it goes.

>>129365323
>coordinated so perfectly that we haven't found a single isolated tribe without consciousness

go to the amazon you fucking retard and learn what consciousness actually is

>>129365446
it has been defined? news to me.
I have read jaynes. he's an idiot and so are you.

>>129365566
>http://news.nationalgeographic.com/2016/12/uncontacted-tribe-amazon-brazil-photos/

kys

>>129365323
It's a little more complicated than that.
>>129365153
He argues that a fundamental part of a fully consious mind is the belief in God? Or that our minds became fully consious only after the contemplation of God?

>>129365566
Being right or wrong doesn't make someone an idiot.

>>129364164
Funny, that's the one book my ex wife's mother recommend me to read.

>>129365781
the merger of divine with the world we live in. God as reason.

>>129365781
are those two not one of the same? hardcore atheists being brainlets is a proven fact, so this theory makes a lot of sense.

>>129365942
When abuse is first off the rank in response to a thread, you are right to assume shills are present in numbers

>>129366158
:)
my man

badabump

>>129366158
Sorry, no I meant. Did they happen concurrently or did one happen before the other.

>>129365323
>>129365566
where'd you go bruh?

File: Fangtooth_moray.jpg (629KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

629KB, 1024x768px

>>129365153
>scientific basis for God

Science is full of dead, sterile concepts. The God that created us, created all the other living creatures. To know them, is to know him.

>>129365942
calling me a fucking retard, however ...

File: ProphetKek.jpg (171KB, 888x1120px) Image search: [Google]

171KB, 888x1120px

>>129366608
both. you expect some individuals to be born with the balance, waiting for the rest of society to gain it. the expected value is that it proceeds, nature is about ordering.

>>129366741
you are talking aobut modern science. Read Dampier shorter history of science (1930s), newton and galileo were men of God, the church saw their work as that of God. The heavy anti church sentiment, like lying about the spanish inquisiton was to kill the church for two reasons:

it killed those who charged interest

foundation of society and stops materialism

Fun sci-fi, not sure it is more than that.

>>129367132
>cites historical, archeological, physiological, psychological, economical sources and theories
>each page has like 15 footnotes with sources
>sci-fi

k

>>129365781
complicated, as in I don't care. he claims sumerian texts show people back then thought their inner monologue is externally generated, and the idea that this is not so spread like wildfire in a couple of centuries across the globe. I don't care about the other 'complexities' until this particular miracle he absolutely needs is explained.

I've often wondered whether our minds formed with the natural inclination toward believing in a creator. This was the only explanation our ancestors could fathom to explain the forces of nature. As natural as the drive for sex and to deny it leaves an emptiness.

>>129367288
as well as almost every other civilization in the area. this is why we get to call you a retard.

>>129367306
is not required, but imagine a civilization reaches a breaking point, the belief in God is more powerful than the belief in self.

It checks out lads, it's a red pill. Take your medicine.

>>129366736
I'm too careless for my own good, having jumped into a mire like this topic. but the need to write a job application will force me out of this thread soon, so whatever shit I stir up will end up unattended anyway.

>>129367284
Richard Hoagland also has sources and footnotes.

>>129367721
source material and quality of fields cited

his argument is more fundamental, and weights the knowledge of the time. Even if some sort of ancient civ existed and did this to humans, the point at which they left the planet would leave an equivalent problem to the one jaynes has solved.

>>129367521
and this spread to hawai'i and the eskimos and to tierra del fuego and the amazon rainforest before we got there. the chinese and indians did not notice the change. right.

the problem with jaynes is that he's obviously a YEC. something like what he describes very likely went down sometime between 800000 and 500000 years ago. but he has to have it recently, because the world is 6000 years old as per reliable writings of the jews. nowhere does he say this, but his provincial shortsightedness vs. historic time durations has no other explanations.
except, of course, if he is an idiot. you surely are.

>>129368253
>800000
you mean 8000 BC. It is clear you didn't read the book, or were mad fucked up when you did. Go back to your apps chief.

>>129368391
he claims 3000 years ago for the timing of the change. anyway, 8000 is too recent as well, plus we have no writings from that age for him to 'analyze'. and no mechanism for the change to spread.

>>129368584
>we have no writings from that age
he gives plenty

like when the first king dropped the surname of "is-my-god" and replaced it with 1st. In addition to the drastic change in law

his argument even includes the evolution of writing. God. Damn.

If this is true, it's absolute genius. Either way, it's fascinating. Who am I to say how people thought in ages past? This also makes me think about my own experiences with religion.

>>129364164
>Consciousness
>Is the state or quality of awareness, or, of being aware of an external object or something within oneself.

All the animals living on earth are conscious, every single one, since fucking forever. The only unconscious fuckers are the ones that can't fucking comprehend this definition, and they are the same imbeciles that say "fish don't feel pain".

File: sortyourselfout.jpg (98KB, 1024x683px) Image search: [Google]

98KB, 1024x683px

This was the book that threw me out of religion last year. Jordan Peterson also takes all the mystery out of it. Together, they turn religion into a practical tool for coping with existence.

>>129369075
no writings from 8000 years ago. what part of
>anyway, 8000 is too recent as well, plus we have no writings from that age for him to 'analyze'.
is too hard for you to understand?

File: Erectus Walks Among Us.jpg (16KB, 260x335px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 260x335px

It is likely that niggers still possess the bicameral mind, which is why they chimp out suddenly like the flick of a light switch.

Maybe why they talk about themselves in third person so often, as well.

/pol/ would definitely be fascinated by this book.

The book in the picture, as well.

>>129369075
anyway, how did the change spread to to tasmania? that's the kind of question fans of jaynes avoid like the plague. oh you elevated ones who have understood the book, unlike me, can't you just summarize HOW THE FUCK DID IT SPREAD ACROSS THE GLOBE? note that I'm not asking why jaynes thinks this or that; I felt like including this here because it seems to be the modus operandi that irrelevant details are presented as if in a bid to prove that you have read the book. I want you to prove that you thought about the book. so how come we haven't caught any human group in the pre-consciousness stage?
also, jaynes and all philosophers claiming that inner monologue is somehow related to consciousness are retards. they never had to internalize a discipline without words. try to learn mathematics, figure out new stuff and struggle with the fact that finding words is fucking difficult, then come back to the idea that inner monologue is anything else but an epiphenomenon. in before creative mathematics happens during unconscious phases.

>>129371165
>anyway, how did the change spread to to tasmania?

I don't think Jaynes implies that "consciousness" spread everywhere. The earlier chapters of his book suggest that you wouldn't notice a big difference between the pre-self-conscious and the post-self-conscious human.

> HOW THE FUCK DID IT SPREAD ACROSS THE GLOBE?

It didn't. That's probably why only a certain part of the world (Middle East and all those other places connected by trade and war) developed the way it did and all other civilizations well out of their reach were all relatively primitive for such a long time.

>>129371843
that's right, he doesn't claim so. however, we have no indication that any culture lacked his version of 'consciousness' by 1500. he simply omits discussing this miracle. what happened? over the extreme stretch of human existence, all human groups achieved consciousness by today, ancient middle east being among the last ones? or the change spread like some weird recrystallization across oceans and shit, with very little contact?
he doesn't posit anything like this because he either implicitly thought of antiquity as the antiquity known to the bible or else he did not want to draw the reader's attention to the problem.
no big difference: yeah, it's even shrinking. soon it will be unobservable, but he still was riiight.
this is a fad.

>>129371843
also, you can't have a link between jaynes' idea of consciousness and civilization, because then you'd have to explain why after many hundreds of thousands of years the first civilizations happened around 6000 years ago. no other group stumbled upon the discovery but in a couple of millennia all did? also, if there were a link between jaynes' idea of consciousness and civilization, as you claim, then the difference would not be so little, as you also claim.