Iain McGilchrist - The Divided Brain and the Making of the Western World
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 3 июн 2024
- Renowned psychiatrist and writer Iain McGilchrist explains how the 'divided brain' has profoundly altered human behaviour, culture and society.
Watch the RSA Animate of this talk: • RSA ANIMATE: The Divid...
Einstein " The intuitive mind is a sacred gift and the rational mind is a faithful servant. We have created a society that honours the servant but has forgotten the gift."
beautifully said ❤️
“A problem properly stated is half solved.” ~ John Dewey
Usually when you state a problem correctly, the solution is obvious.
"We only understand things by comparing them with something else we think we know even better." ~ Iain McGilchrist
Excellent talk. I agree this should be animated, and Dr McGilchrist should be re-invited because this is one of the best RSA lectures I've ever seen. Perhaps the one fault is that he has spent so much time going in-depth (which to him was probably just skimming the surface) that there was not enough time for specifics on how it has impacted society.
We could skip a few royal economists and politicians and allow Mr McGilchrist a few sessions to elaborate further on this very interesting topic?
The Einstein quote at the end is awesome.
Notes: 'CONTEXT' is everything in understanding. Neglect of context is the single great disaster in philosophy. The 'real' mountain is the one in which we play the least part (its material reality).In context we need to protect and maintain the implicit nature of things, by making them explicit we change them and they become something else. Genomes code according to context they find themselves in... understanding does not come out of sidling many out of context items together. very powerful
I was having the mind/ machine discussion with a researcher neuroscientist recently and I needed this turn of phrase, in the absence of a model for comparison we go into to default mode and not knowing what model the mind best compares to we go to the default model: machine i.e. computer. J Searle held a fine discussion on how the computer could never 'be' exactly like our minds.
Excellent lecture, short and clear. The whole picture :D
Iain on grand form here with the RSA and just down the list a rather good RSAnimate to go with the principle monologue.
clif9710: NB: there is the pause button for your empowerment! Pause and reflect and then continue; this is especially useful for the condensed versions of the lectures. I get attracted and hooked by the RSA videos and then go look for the longer version.
Thanks for self-illuminating talk about brain that separated myths and truths in content forms and grounded contexts.
so glad he spoke about the different hemispheres of the brains working together
No one is responsible for other people's interpretations. The Source's responsibility is to make sure that the delivered message is clear, to give proven examples if needed, and to "surrender" it all. Truth stands on its own.
Is there a longer version to this presentation, a podcast perhaps? THANKS
Excellent talk...
Biological facets seem to have been well explored in the past, but the characteristics of the hemispheres on societal development are new to me and very thought provoking.
.
Only distantly related but:
I read an article that showed how the different emotional dispositions of individuals determine their political affiliations: fearful dispositions for conservative politics, and adventurous enterprising dispositions for liberal politics. Not too hemisphere-related, sorry!
I really enjoyed this presentation!!
This is very interesting indeed. I will have a look at the book.
More people should watch this video!
Jill Bolte Taylor explains the way our 2 brains can work together ❤️
Context is everything ✅
@XArcane I've read the book, and yes, he was just skimming the surface. The most information-dense book I've ever read, and enjoyed reading, for that matter. I highly recommend it!
yes, every sentence seems like it would take a lifetime of intensive study to craft....
This is what meditation does, this is also what the bible talks about when it says one must have a renewing mind. All of these concepts and how to practice this focusing of consciousness has been known for thousands of years. This is my opinion and it will probably be ill received, but the speaker speaks from a pure intellectual understanding and the manner in which he describes and speaks things is devoid of heart. If you want a talk from an experiencer of this, go to the spiritual teachers.
Heh, sure. Hindsight is 20-20.
I was just looking information about the left and right brain and then RSA happens to publish this lecture. Interesting topic and it would be even more interesting to see this train of thought applied to many other things. One could examine different political ideologies and see which side of thinking governs in each one.
Damian - I'm not addressing creativity, etc., only learning the topic being addressed by the speaker. It's been shown that multi-tasking doesn't work and I think the drawing combined with speaking is a good example of asking the brain to process two sensory inputs at the same time that are dealing with the exact same thing. A traffic light and a traffic cop can both indicate STOP, but having both on the corner at the same time is confusing, not an improvement over either one alone.
This bloke is really interesting. Thanks
@drizztmay Animation comes out on the 21st of October... They put up a preview today. =)
Imagine what it is like for those with a dominant Right Sided Brain, we normally only get the lecture without the drawing! We do the scribbling, contextualising and understanding internally in order to understand; imagine doing that for every lecture you have ever received?
If your imagination isn't up to it then enjoy the 'faithful servant' which is your brain.
Tragic that this has so few views.
fascinating topic - on a similar vain, Tony Wrights book, 'Left In The Dark' is truly enlightening. :)
This guy has a cool voice.
Please see Jill Bolte Taylor about Whole Brain Living... her knowledge and direct experience explains the Two Brain s locations and functions. I disagree with the way the book was edited and presented it trivializes it, but the truth is so real and helpful.
I do think that similar concepts have been known for a very long time. I also adore Iain McGilchrist. And no matter how strongly one believes, my hierarchy is clear: I have great religious respect for spiritual teachers. I place social and ethical geniuses like McGilchrist miles above those either way.
everything which is confirmed by modern science was well known in ancient civilizations. it is documented in occult, esoteric and sacred books..
He seems to parallel Kant, left is understanding, right is reason. Im still reading Kant and just started listening to McGillchrist.
What does he say about Kant?
Spellbinding insight.
I spent years in finding answers to Why-questions before i realised what everyone who has children could have told me: There is ALWAYS the next Why-question...
So then i spent years in finding answers to How-questions. I took a while, and more complicated questions until i realised i got some answers to early unsolved Why-questions!!!
And now, i'd say BOTH of my brains don't know what question to ask about that fact!!
Anyway i'll have my Atlas-bone readjusted soon - we'll see.
Thanks for upload!
That's why so many religious leaders, film actors and politicians even though they have luxury they act and teach simplicity. People use only right brain forget and forgive those leaders time and again.
transcription anywhere??
nice
at 21:45 pure comedy gold!
By what mechanism is the relative weighting of each hemisphere decided or determined in a given time and place, by what means is it promulgated, why does anyone assent to it or not, and where is this mechanism located? In the brain? Outside the brain?
Where you have gone wrong is not to pay attention to Jill Bolte Taylor's direct experience of left and right brain My Stroke of Insight...and how they Both exist in each of us and if understood and recogized can work together to effectively change the world.
@swaggaking35
A rhetorical question is a figure of speech in the form of a question posed for its persuasive effect without the expectation of a reply.[1] Rhetorical questions encourage the listener to think about what the (often obvious) answer to the question must be. When a speaker states, "How much longer must our people endure this injustice?", no formal answer is expected PERIOD?
That question at the end was typical of left-hemisphere thinking of trying to control the message ;)
The same thing occurred to me. So my guess would be to give experience of the complexity. What do you think?
Your comment is clever, but I feel like the act of labeling that question 'so left brain' is ironically an instance of that same reductionist generalization the question, and answer, were concerned about.
Makes me think of Hegel's philosophy, in specific the master-slave dialectic.
@clif9710 I felt the same way, this one did not translate well to the animation as some of the others have.
the urge to the security of certainty...
JILL BOLTE TAYLOR- MY STROKE OF INSIGHT !! Explains All of this through direct experience and intelligent analysis.
The book to read is JILL BOLTE TAYLOR MY STROKE OF INSIGHT...
@thebp9999 if you read the book you may find out why
Perhaps it's germane to the topic that I cannot grasp this lecture when it is presented in the RSA Animate way...too dense, too distracting, too tightly edited and rapid. When Machiavelli is mentioned, I know the connotation intended, to have a tiny picture of Machiavelli drawn for me at the same time is irrelevant. This pertains to the lecture point about the utility of a map when one doesn't need/want to know all information about the area. To come watch the original lecture was a relief.
The brain evolved in VERTICAL axis and CNS operates as lateral interaction from spinal to midbrain, to diencephalon, to basal forebrain before ever getting to cortex. Evolution of CNS is VERTICAL with more polysynaptic input/output circuits above inhibiting and capturing lower ones. But there's influence from below too. We're nowhere where we can hypothesize what this man sais. Brain computer is way above us. Alas, psychiatrists always simplify preoccupations of neurologists & neurobiologists!
how can he breathe with his glasses on nostrils like that?!
good video thanks
We make a map of reality on our heads, then go on mistaking the map for the place.
please!
@drizztmay well, maybe the short version. He is a little less entertaining than most animated talks.
All of this is wonderful except for the weird assertion that porcupines can’t climb trees
I wonder if it's ok to ask if you know why the brain is physically twisted.
I can't agree with this guy - but I want too.
Here's another brilliant interview with Iain Mcgilchrist on the divided brain: /watch?v=SVM5nufv6Fs&t=404s
somebody has to translate this book into german
Ironic
The speaker discusses how the brain creates realities, &
you think the way you (want to?) perceive reality is THE way everyone SHOULD, evidenced by your conclusion.
Anyone's method of working on in/out sense data can be examined for effectiveness & efficiency in learning, but what if a given person simply enjoys things "clever & eyecatching" - or for any reason having no identified future "benefit"?
Creativity = mind play, not measurement of info content, etc.
Don't like? -> Edit reality.
Jill bolty Taylor's Stroke of Insight of insight please read it! And you will understand what you are saying in a better way.
This explains religion and its inherent limits.
🙏👍🔊🌹♥️
AM
"We have to protect it...",so the blind man needs a guide,Tiresias said to Kreon,only the blind man.You don't have to protect anything,otherwise,Carlin would have said.What are we then,have we decided yet?Critical thinking...freedom of choice...what is real and what's an illusion?“Travel far enough, you meet yourself.”
Sorry, without empirical evidence a scientific analysis remain an opinion. And this talk lacks the mass of scientists behind this theory. But a nice talk and rationalization thought.
He starts by dismissing an old theory to a new theory. This new theory is interesting but where are the evidence from brain science?
The left right shape is a datapoint that proven, how is bigger front right hemi contribute to this theory? Is it because there is larger PFC? What about bigger left back hemi. Is it
The drawing is superfluous, adding nothing to the content while providing additional sensory stimulation. This can also be said for many PowerPoint presentations, but at least in that situation the PP slides provide written points that can be taken down for notes, helping the listener recall the lecture later. While the animated drawing is clever and eye-catching, the information content is zero, because it is reiterating what is being said. It's a gimmick. Good speaking requires no graphics.
Verbosity = Lecture Circuit. He paints a pastishe of words that simmer in the collective unconscious. Being wordy no one realises there's no originality.
Jii
Not a very clear or integrated presentation; indeed one struggles to understand the main thesis after 17 minutes in. Perhaps Iain has had his own corpus callous severed. To the extent that this mishmash of concepts permits itself to be understood, the overall impression one gets is of some fanciful form of self obsession - an ironic result for a psychiatrist, or one might think…
Anyone with half a brain can see that........or not.
😎😄
I wish he hadn't ended the speech with a fake quote. A lovely quote but fake.
That "quote" is apparently a paraphrase of Einstein by another person. Here is a somewhat similar quote attributable Einstein from a collection of essays 'Out of My Later Years (1950)': "And certainly we should take care not to make the intellect our god; it has, of course, powerful muscles, but no personality. It cannot lead, it can only serve; and it is not fastidious in its choice of a leader."
it all at womans expense ..skeatesy
Did it ever occur to anyone here, he might not know what he is talking about? He is quoting everybody else work. His book is about a collection of other peoples findings, whether or not they are correct. We do not possess Neanderthals corpus callosum in which to compare with our own. Nor any other so call primitive man.
Moreover; We can see the difference in behavior from a newly discovered indigenous headhunter compared to their later civilized educated grandchildren. And their behavior will be strikingly different! Same genetics, brains nearly identical, yet the outcome profoundly different.
The brain is a very complex thing, it is an organ we use, but it is not us. Your right foot is your right foot, but it is not the true essence of you. The only thing I can take away from this presentation is as follows. We are limited by just 3 things. Our natural IQ. Our Nations' IQ. And finally, our worlds IQ. With a brain that is plastic, we grow, learn, do, achieve. But only if the way is prepared for us to do so. And that will be true for all people who are not geniuses. Geniuses, in contrast; are using rationality and intuition combined, to find ways to overcome any barriers impeding their journey.
McGilchrist does not answer or even attempt to show us how we can do that. This presentation is lacking as to how we all can move forward to rearrange a better world by better braining.
*****
in 1966 a liberal socialist psychologist philosophic college professional encourage many gullible students to permit themselves to use potentially irreversible mind altering drugs by a harmless phrase, turn on, tune in, drop out. Very few if any tested that truth of that statement. Causing the brain to hallucinate does not mean you have had a genuine spiritual experience.
Then came so called enlighten college and university students quoting Nietzsche death of God quote as if it were gospel truth. Well, we have Nietzsche death certificate, but not Gods. It is always a wise thing to explore the truth of things before believing in them.
McGilchrist invites the audience to find any mistakes in his book, but I believe none will even try. And what will happen if you try and do find errors?
You see, if there are errors, McGilchrist will simply say, "I am still right, but the person who I quoted, it was he that is in error." See his method of persuasion?...
+HipHopFanaticz Would I do mushrooms? Well, with that comes: hallucinations, disorganized thoughts and speech, disorganized behavior, loss of energy and will power, erratic emotional swings, impaired functioning leading to an inability to function in society as a productive person. Would I do mushrooms, hell no. Not that nor any other illegal drug. They are illegal for the reason they cause ordinary people to behave in toxic ways. But that applies only to me, as I must take of me the best way I see fit.
In the last minutes of life, we review what we have done with our limited time here. I suspect that the real you behind that avatar, understands that and one day will contribute a significant measure to the lives of the real people around you. For social media is like a taped comedy show with a laugh track. It appears to have a vast audience, but in the end it is all an illusion. I wish you the very best.
lol, thanks.
+MrPanetela
The author is very up front about this, in all the lectures he gives and in the book itself.
Mr McGilchrist has accumulated his ideas from study, and is presenting what he has found (from others and his own rumination), drawing the ideas together; which is sort of what all authors, even in the realm of science, do.
Perhaps, Mr Pantela, you prefer the blustering, authority figures that just present their studies (of others' works) as their own? The way you write is as such an 'authority'.
Perhaps you feel threatened by the greater intellect? Regardless, it is tiresome.
Interesting how you do like talk to yourself, through your own responses; or did another or others get tired of your self-congratulatory prattle and pull their attempts at conversation?