I was really curious to check out that first book after your short version.
But damn, the subject matter of that second book might draw my attention first. The Buddhist approach & techniques made so much sense to me in a completely pragmatic way.
I might have to order myself physical copies of both of these to read outside by my koi pond on cool fall days. The fact that the whole scene will be so on the nose to the point of being cliched will just amuse me further, lol.
Thanks for the recommendations!
te_abstract_art@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
I think it’s important to point out that the bicameral mind is one theory, but that doesn’t necessarily mean it’s true. One of its major criticisms is that it suggests consciousness only arose in humans around the time we started writing about it, and that it didn’t exist in humans before then. It’s also entirely possible that humans were conscious way before that, but when we started writing about it was just when we developed the cultural concept of what consciousness is.
The theory also seems to imply there is something special about human metacognitive processes compared to other animals, which would therefore imply that animals are not conscious. That seems weirdly reductive when various non-human animals show some evidence of self-awareness (mirror spot test, Alex the grey parrot).
It’s a nice theory which ties lots of things together, but it’s no more true than any other theory of consciousness at the moment.
blargh513@sh.itjust.works 3 weeks ago
Correct. In the case of the question, I believe there is value to be gained, even if there are flaws in the argument.