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/
The Origin of Consciousness by Julian Jaynes changed my life. Everyone has to resolve their own journey, and the approach and discussion of this great mystery given by JJ has made me a more thoughtful person. I can't recommend Dr. Jaymes work highly enough, and am so grateful for his work.
Is it possible that being full of believed and invested thought is lacking free awareness, and that insight opens the more conscious investment or clothing of insight in translation or embodiment of form? While that may seem a play on words. I see that words shape our thought and so often assign insight in terms of a thinking. Gratitude is both a receipt and the extending of receipt. And resolving or reconciling our own personal sense of self is indeed a journey in consciousness or indeed of consciousness through what we thought to be.
Perhaps to question thought accepted and presumed self-evidently true, and thereby shift to a more integrated perspective. Challenged people find their thinking inadequate - hence the resort to external powers by which to escape powerlessness or at least blame it on failure of others, idols or ideologies and so find escape in grievance and victimhood. Perhaps 'most people' are perceived in terms of what I assign them. If they do not meet my expectations I see a sense of lack. Awareness of my own thinking is the freedom to relate with what is instead of seeing the world in terms of lack-driven power struggle or powerlessness. In relating honestly a movement is felt to align in true need felt rather than a set of false needs in reaction.
Be sure to read Julian Jaynes's "The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown in the Bicameral Mind" and our related books for a different perspective.
Hi I'm scared I don't want consciousness to be flipped around like a tool for despots. Technology is a tool of course and people are bonded to it. Montague I believe said that we are evolving to technology but not through our mentality to control the potential of our externals. I was thinking the gardening might be a good thing to do. Because gardening is something or you can be by yourself create and care for things and not be inundated by parafrans and metafrans that are juggled around in your mind like a bubble gum machine exploding.
@@JulianJaynesSociety Is this lecture included in the Bronze Membership level or would I have to purchase the package separately? Julian Jaynes - Consciousness and the Voices of the Mind (Including Bonus Materials)
@@ImprovingAbility Jaynes presented this lecture many times. The audio here is from the digital download version. Other presentations of the same lecture, both audio and video, are available for members (all levels).
I would not limit the hallucinations to 'thinking' or 'words' as such but as an emergent structure of consciousness through archetypal themes that are both our mythological pre history and our underlying narrative identity that has been built on or derived from and generated by such patterns. We are thus engaging not only via the internet, but via an hallucinatory structure or model or consciousness and world. What then are 'we'? An hallucination runs in the mind of its perceiver, but the first hallucination was the lock down and self-isolation under fear of pain of loss - as survival set in self-consciousness running within a latent but discarded or denied self-awareness. Not unlike the idea of the prodigal son ; a split off sense of self set as a mind apart.
@@binra3788 Damn, you really care about deez "words" man. Seems like they're really keepin you down man, well thats just like your opinion man what about deez : hhshjahvfk shjkckcnhdhhsbedi hssuujdbdohebz njciiidheherjrjxhsb jdjdjnjxj gsjnrbfohyba dkkjehufhwap decypher that brutha, and you will find true meaning!
Jno Cook's Saturnian Cosmology book/site linked to Jayne's work ie saturniancosmology.org/syn.php The perspective Cook offers (along with many others involved in Plasma mythology and the Electric Universe Idea) posits actual experience of our forebears of cosmological events that are then mythologised and internalised or replicated in human thought and behaviour - or rather - the imprinting or conditioning of awe and terror that initiated and structured a dissociated subjective consciousness operating as an overlay or cover story to an amnesial denial and defence. I mention this here in case it is interesting. Insofar as the past conditions the present to ensure a future in its likeness, it does so as a presently burdened complex of accumulated baggage. The past is a construct of a present lacking presence, when it persists a pattern of adaptation to threat no longer present. It is also called our mind.
Consciousness is not 'in' anything or located anywhere - excepting as our experience of self-defining reflects the active desire of (wish for), and focus in. But the experience of the world is not out there - nor is it experienced 'in your head'. Reality definition is in relation to, within the movement of a shifting focus of qualities that are innate to existence. I am engaging in a consideration with you - as a sense of being moved. The desire to know is also the desire to share because one alone knows not existence and I am (of) the movement to know and be known - with you. The nature of knowing is intimacy where the nature of seeming to know about is the way of a split mind that posits intimacy as death to investment in a dissociative capacity associated with salvation, survival, power and protection in time and space - that is as a persistence of unfolding experience separated from Intimacy. This is not so different than the myth of Narcissus, in which a reflection of self image substitutes for a true relational movement of being. The development of the dissociative consciousness is driven and itself drives a dislocation and displacement in the idea of judgement or control. Within the world of such conflicted self struggle, judgement always excludes or rejects. The denials of the consciousness effectively structure its world-experience as un-owned or unknown Self. While it posits 'consciousness' to the active denial of its own Intimate source nature. In this way it rules by ruling out - and becomes the subjected and subjective experience to the rule or measure of its own giving. In every instant we are giving all the meaning that anything has for us, as we are receiving Meaning through the filters of interpreted learning that distort or even reverse the communication of life to the consciousness in form. The development of the structure and abilities of mind becomes the instrument of self-aware creation - which is quite opposite to the attempt to create alone or as a private capacity that generated the seeming split of a mind masking under subjection to terror of miscreative conflict. There are many streams of reflection for awakening consciousness where an unconsciousness thought it thought alone. And the desire to know is the frequency of resonance that aligns matching pathways to our individual but shared awakening. Perhaps the key to a living movement of intimacy is the stirring by which we change our mind about our mind - for though this may be unsettling to who we think we are and habitually react as, it restores to the living that which was 'dead, blind or asleep' in substitution. This awakened movement of the re-cognition, re-membering and reintegrative acceptance, is in place of what seemed real before - but ignored, discarded, suppressed, denied or attacked. The difference is a reversal of the Reversal by which limitation and division are suffered real because we wanted it thus - and hid the desire in guilt assigned false-flag to the 'other'. To use your brother thus is to lose true relation for a cover story or narrative control and continuity in the wish of personal power. Define, predict and control operates an embodiment of lack-seeking power. "And who told you you were naked sayeth the Lord?" witnesses to the quality of the ability of Consciousness to question not only the 'emperor's clothes' but of the need to present authority in externalised forms of symbolic substitutions for being. Narrative control and fake news - along with the cargo cult of symbols that no longer point to original or direct experience - has become the manipulative nature of the human world for those who find no belonging in its asserted incoherence. Release of manipulative bias is the willingness to be with what is, as it is - as true basis from which to relate, communicate, think and perceive anew. No one can release what they are not the owner of - and so awareness of thought in act is the basis of freedom to think or create of a wholeness of being instead of a basis in denied conflict. Intimacy is already true - not some future state for 'separate ones' to join in. Thought cannot leave the mind that thinks them, but they can be shared and strengthened.
@@morgalberth187 I am willing to respect your right to say no to anything - true or not! Free will is in the heart as truth accepted - not coerced. As I didn't ask a yes or no question, I take your 'no' to be a blanket disagreement. You don't need my permission to live your own but you asked for my response. I don't seek the agreement of others as opinion - but invite resonance that strengthens you in your own sense of self and life. If you find nothing resonant in my offering why indeed engage in it?
@Lisa G I use Intimacy with a capital 'I' as transparency to being. So Self-imaged becomes a split focus or choice between an image of reality and its yielding or release to Source. Identity in form generates a sense of lack or limitation, from which the attempt to gain power or create as a private sense of self generates split levels of mind which become the configuration of mind as a 'cover story' for what become separation trauma. The willingness to use the symbols to reflect consciousness is a freedom to let in information that indeed stretches back to the Dawn and Depth of Consciousness. But the symbols point, they do not self exist as reality. Images taken as self-existence operate symbolically. Insofar as we gave meanings of separation, conflict and control, we suffer such meanings until re-cognising the original behind the symbol. Adam and Eve shared a willingness to create unlike God, and thus to cover a sense of its lack and limitation. Nakedness before God is not bottoms and willies - but Intimacy of being perfectly known. Self-guilting judgement (which is the nature of creating unlike God) fears exposure as a damning or or invalidating of being, but it is the cover story that does that, in defence against healing to a true Intimacy of being that of itself extends - and we know theias abeing unselfconsciously moved - without 'taking thought for our 'self image' - which is a mask unto our self as well as a mask facing out to the world. The underlying Meaning I feel for is the release of the blocks to honesty of being as a conscious willingness in place of a coercive covering over under fear. (The lockdown, distancing and masking in virtue set against perceived evils. Though I wrote this it is no more nor less that a 'take'. You are obviously listening in to Consciousness so as to allow insights to arise and I join with you in an integrative willingness for understanding that heals or wholes rather than defines and controls.
@Lisa G You are thinking physically. My sense of intimacy is not physical but relational transparency - and because that CAN occur in physical relationship, people try to 'get it there' from out of a sense of lack. This becomes fear and neediness or control agenda masking in the 'forms' of love and as you say is false and dangerous or destructive to engage in - and an education to walk free of. Thanks for being you.
@Lisa G There is work, but there is grace, or the gift of any moment of true alignment. Growing trust in yourself is part of recognising others. If we open to that which has no respect or relation with us we hurt ourself. No one can hurt us like we can ourselves, but this is not obvious when we are set in fear or grievance. But the core meaning of Intimacy as I use it is between you and your Self - however you relate to the truth of what you are - as distinct for ideas grown from experiences about yourself. Our true being is also the guidance as to how to be with any situation - including those who are not in their right mind (hateful or indifferent to love). Insofar as you are in your integrity nothing can come in that has not some business with you. If you are tuned into 'fear' channel, you can attract of invite what you don't want by looking for its, so as to then hide or defend against. Love is not seeking or needing payment. If we are it isn't love and we get back something we don't expect - which can be an education. Which is what I read you as actively engaged in ;-)
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/
The Origin of Consciousness by Julian Jaynes changed my life. Everyone has to resolve their own journey, and the approach and discussion of this great mystery given by JJ has made me a more thoughtful person. I can't recommend Dr. Jaymes work highly enough, and am so grateful for his work.
Is it possible that being full of believed and invested thought is lacking free awareness, and that insight opens the more conscious investment or clothing of insight in translation or embodiment of form?
While that may seem a play on words. I see that words shape our thought and so often assign insight in terms of a thinking. Gratitude is both a receipt and the extending of receipt. And resolving or reconciling our own personal sense of self is indeed a journey in consciousness or indeed of consciousness through what we thought to be.
Dr. Jaynes' book challenged people to THINK. Most are not up to that.
Perhaps to question thought accepted and presumed self-evidently true, and thereby shift to a more integrated perspective. Challenged people find their thinking inadequate - hence the resort to external powers by which to escape powerlessness or at least blame it on failure of others, idols or ideologies and so find escape in grievance and victimhood. Perhaps 'most people' are perceived in terms of what I assign them. If they do not meet my expectations I see a sense of lack. Awareness of my own thinking is the freedom to relate with what is instead of seeing the world in terms of lack-driven power struggle or powerlessness. In relating honestly a movement is felt to align in true need felt rather than a set of false needs in reaction.
Where can we find the full lecture?
It's been said, we have this ability because we are made in the image of God.
Be sure to read Julian Jaynes's "The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown in the Bicameral Mind" and our related books for a different perspective.
Hi I'm scared I don't want consciousness to be flipped around like a tool for despots. Technology is a tool of course and people are bonded to it. Montague I believe said that we are evolving to technology but not through our mentality to control the potential of our externals. I was thinking the gardening might be a good thing to do. Because gardening is something or you can be by yourself create and care for things and not be inundated by parafrans and metafrans that are juggled around in your mind like a bubble gum machine exploding.
Is there a full lecture available somewhere or has all been removed from the public domain?
Yes, at julianjaynes.org.
@@JulianJaynesSociety Is this lecture included in the Bronze Membership level or would I have to purchase the package separately? Julian Jaynes - Consciousness and the Voices of the Mind (Including Bonus Materials)
@@ImprovingAbility Jaynes presented this lecture many times. The audio here is from the digital download version. Other presentations of the same lecture, both audio and video, are available for members (all levels).
is this the Voice of the Master?
Indeed it is.
more please
What was the date of the lecture, the description doesn’t say? Thank you
October 14, 1982... we will update the description, thank you.
THE idea that human consciousness first developed as auditory hallucinations really blows my mind
I would not limit the hallucinations to 'thinking' or 'words' as such but as an emergent structure of consciousness through archetypal themes that are both our mythological pre history and our underlying narrative identity that has been built on or derived from and generated by such patterns.
We are thus engaging not only via the internet, but via an hallucinatory structure or model or consciousness and world. What then are 'we'?
An hallucination runs in the mind of its perceiver, but the first hallucination was the lock down and self-isolation under fear of pain of loss - as survival set in self-consciousness running within a latent but discarded or denied self-awareness.
Not unlike the idea of the prodigal son ; a split off sense of self set as a mind apart.
The stoned ape hypothesis aligns with this.
@@binra3788 Damn, you really care about deez "words" man. Seems like they're really keepin you down man, well thats just like your opinion man what about deez : hhshjahvfk shjkckcnhdhhsbedi hssuujdbdohebz njciiidheherjrjxhsb jdjdjnjxj gsjnrbfohyba dkkjehufhwap decypher that brutha, and you will find true meaning!
Jno Cook's Saturnian Cosmology book/site linked to Jayne's work
ie saturniancosmology.org/syn.php
The perspective Cook offers (along with many others involved in Plasma mythology and the Electric Universe Idea) posits actual experience of our forebears of cosmological events that are then mythologised and internalised or replicated in human thought and behaviour - or rather - the imprinting or conditioning of awe and terror that initiated and structured a dissociated subjective consciousness operating as an overlay or cover story to an amnesial denial and defence.
I mention this here in case it is interesting.
Insofar as the past conditions the present to ensure a future in its likeness, it does so as a presently burdened complex of accumulated baggage. The past is a construct of a present lacking presence, when it persists a pattern of adaptation to threat no longer present. It is also called our mind.
Consciousness is not 'in' anything or located anywhere - excepting as our experience of self-defining reflects the active desire of (wish for), and focus in. But the experience of the world is not out there - nor is it experienced 'in your head'.
Reality definition is in relation to, within the movement of a shifting focus of qualities that are innate to existence.
I am engaging in a consideration with you - as a sense of being moved. The desire to know is also the desire to share because one alone knows not existence and I am (of) the movement to know and be known - with you.
The nature of knowing is intimacy where the nature of seeming to know about is the way of a split mind that posits intimacy as death to investment in a dissociative capacity associated with salvation, survival, power and protection in time and space - that is as a persistence of unfolding experience separated from Intimacy. This is not so different than the myth of Narcissus, in which a reflection of self image substitutes for a true relational movement of being.
The development of the dissociative consciousness is driven and itself drives a dislocation and displacement in the idea of judgement or control. Within the world of such conflicted self struggle, judgement always excludes or rejects. The denials of the consciousness effectively structure its world-experience as un-owned or unknown Self. While it posits 'consciousness' to the active denial of its own Intimate source nature. In this way it rules by ruling out - and becomes the subjected and subjective experience to the rule or measure of its own giving.
In every instant we are giving all the meaning that anything has for us, as we are receiving Meaning through the filters of interpreted learning that distort or even reverse the communication of life to the consciousness in form. The development of the structure and abilities of mind becomes the instrument of self-aware creation - which is quite opposite to the attempt to create alone or as a private capacity that generated the seeming split of a mind masking under subjection to terror of miscreative conflict.
There are many streams of reflection for awakening consciousness where an unconsciousness thought it thought alone. And the desire to know is the frequency of resonance that aligns matching pathways to our individual but shared awakening.
Perhaps the key to a living movement of intimacy is the stirring by which we change our mind about our mind - for though this may be unsettling to who we think we are and habitually react as, it restores to the living that which was 'dead, blind or asleep' in substitution. This awakened movement of the re-cognition, re-membering and reintegrative acceptance, is in place of what seemed real before - but ignored, discarded, suppressed, denied or attacked. The difference is a reversal of the Reversal by which limitation and division are suffered real because we wanted it thus - and hid the desire in guilt assigned false-flag to the 'other'. To use your brother thus is to lose true relation for a cover story or narrative control and continuity in the wish of personal power. Define, predict and control operates an embodiment of lack-seeking power.
"And who told you you were naked sayeth the Lord?" witnesses to the quality of the ability of Consciousness to question not only the 'emperor's clothes' but of the need to present authority in externalised forms of symbolic substitutions for being.
Narrative control and fake news - along with the cargo cult of symbols that no longer point to original or direct experience - has become the manipulative nature of the human world for those who find no belonging in its asserted incoherence.
Release of manipulative bias is the willingness to be with what is, as it is - as true basis from which to relate, communicate, think and perceive anew. No one can release what they are not the owner of - and so awareness of thought in act is the basis of freedom to think or create of a wholeness of being instead of a basis in denied conflict. Intimacy is already true - not some future state for 'separate ones' to join in. Thought cannot leave the mind that thinks them, but they can be shared and strengthened.
No , are you willing to agree to disagree ?
@@morgalberth187 I am willing to respect your right to say no to anything - true or not!
Free will is in the heart as truth accepted - not coerced.
As I didn't ask a yes or no question, I take your 'no' to be a blanket disagreement. You don't need my permission to live your own but you asked for my response.
I don't seek the agreement of others as opinion - but invite resonance that strengthens you in your own sense of self and life. If you find nothing resonant in my offering why indeed engage in it?
@Lisa G I use Intimacy with a capital 'I' as transparency to being. So Self-imaged becomes a split focus or choice between an image of reality and its yielding or release to Source. Identity in form generates a sense of lack or limitation, from which the attempt to gain power or create as a private sense of self generates split levels of mind which become the configuration of mind as a 'cover story' for what become separation trauma.
The willingness to use the symbols to reflect consciousness is a freedom to let in information that indeed stretches back to the Dawn and Depth of Consciousness. But the symbols point, they do not self exist as reality. Images taken as self-existence operate symbolically. Insofar as we gave meanings of separation, conflict and control, we suffer such meanings until re-cognising the original behind the symbol. Adam and Eve shared a willingness to create unlike God, and thus to cover a sense of its lack and limitation.
Nakedness before God is not bottoms and willies - but Intimacy of being perfectly known. Self-guilting judgement (which is the nature of creating unlike God) fears exposure as a damning or or invalidating of being, but it is the cover story that does that, in defence against healing to a true Intimacy of being that of itself extends - and we know theias abeing unselfconsciously moved - without 'taking thought for our 'self image' - which is a mask unto our self as well as a mask facing out to the world.
The underlying Meaning I feel for is the release of the blocks to honesty of being as a conscious willingness in place of a coercive covering over under fear. (The lockdown, distancing and masking in virtue set against perceived evils.
Though I wrote this it is no more nor less that a 'take'. You are obviously listening in to Consciousness so as to allow insights to arise and I join with you in an integrative willingness for understanding that heals or wholes rather than defines and controls.
@Lisa G You are thinking physically. My sense of intimacy is not physical but relational transparency - and because that CAN occur in physical relationship, people try to 'get it there' from out of a sense of lack. This becomes fear and neediness or control agenda masking in the 'forms' of love and as you say is false and dangerous or destructive to engage in - and an education to walk free of.
Thanks for being you.
@Lisa G There is work, but there is grace, or the gift of any moment of true alignment. Growing trust in yourself is part of recognising others. If we open to that which has no respect or relation with us we hurt ourself. No one can hurt us like we can ourselves, but this is not obvious when we are set in fear or grievance.
But the core meaning of Intimacy as I use it is between you and your Self - however you relate to the truth of what you are - as distinct for ideas grown from experiences about yourself. Our true being is also the guidance as to how to be with any situation - including those who are not in their right mind (hateful or indifferent to love). Insofar as you are in your integrity nothing can come in that has not some business with you. If you are tuned into 'fear' channel, you can attract of invite what you don't want by looking for its, so as to then hide or defend against. Love is not seeking or needing payment. If we are it isn't love and we get back something we don't expect - which can be an education. Which is what I read you as actively engaged in ;-)