Wow I've been saying this for years! I think most people are aware of these things but they lack the platform to talk about it. Only just discovered McGilchrest but I hope he makes it to the mainstream.
This is one of the best books I've read in a long time. Could hardly put it down. Much of what Mcgilchrist writes about I have been thinking, obviously, not as knowledgeably and technically as gilchrist - for at least the last 5 years. There is obviously a dichotomy within ourselves, what Buber conceived as the difference between relating in the manner of "I-thou' and "I-It". Mcgilchrist shreds the idea that what we give language to - how we describe the world - is the world itself, as opposed to emphasizing one aspect while pushing into the background other aspects. Language and the skills of the left hemisphere are deceptively powerful in the sense that, if you aren't aware of what language is doing - the "constructive" purpose of it, which allows us to fix and manipulate external things - it'll eventually become your sole way of understanding things. I'm reminded of how retarded this way of thinking can make you by the story of the eminent behaviorist John Watson. The right brain knows how to raise children - whether it be thought of as our mammalian need to nurture and care for our young, or a strong psychological feeling one has to be good and nurturing with your child - however it is cognized or understood by the parent, the intuitive response is "attachment". The right brain establishes emotional connection, closeness and security in relationships. However, Watson was living during the heyday of left-brain behaviorism. To him, and to many scientists today, emotions are "yucky" "contemptible" "subhuman" "embarrassing" - basic feelings that no doubt underlie their cognitive judgements. So, John Watson wrote a book on how to parent; in it, he recommends that parents not hug their children, not show any emotional connection, in essence, because in his view, children "appeared to love" their parents, not because it was an ingrained emotional need of every mammal, but because children recognized (a left brain assumption) that parents give them things i.e. food, shelter etc. To make a long story short, his daughter attempted suicide on multiple occasions and his son succeeded in killing himself. As Daniel Goleman argues, emotional intelligence is more important than a "cognitive intelligence" i.e a left brained mechanistic view, since the former is simply wiser than the latter. Scientists who subscribe to a left brain mechanistic worldview simply dont have the emotional maturity - awareness - to realize that they are following the path forewarned by Aldous Huxleys brave new world.
I enjoyed your comment Mike, but that we should favour one hemisphere's way over that of the other sounds, paradoxically, like an idea the left would like most (; they are (and should be) fundamentally entangled. though the balance sure seems a little off, and not to the right side... poor Watson - and his children(
Yes, isn't it yaky to have contempt towards emotions, true attachment and seeing them as subhuman and embarrassing. Ironically, l wrote 'to feel contempt' ...then deleted...hahaha. I was/am always wondering what this left-right story had to do with psychopathy...and ...haha to politics, seriously
@@alinashron5051 Yes, mine is bit..a lot..off to the right/wrong side, cz it's not a bit. Agree, but wonder what too much of left/wrong results. Fusinating.
🙏❤️🌍🕊🎵🎶 "The Matter and His Emissary," The Divided Brain and the Making of the Western World, "The Matter With Things," The Divided Brain and the Unmaking of the Western World." (2 volumes) by Dr.Iain McGilchrist and lectures on TH-cam. There are many discussions in various fields with discussions about these issues enlightening our world.
Thank you Dr Mcgilchirst, what an amazing presentation on a vert vital topic, especially given the times we are living through. As a particle physicist, I struggled with the reductionist approach of science, reducing the world to a handful of particles and forces, which at the end of the day, make up a very small fraction of the universe, the rest which are labelled 'dark matter/energy'. What you speak about, this dance between being a part of and apart from, is something that Rumi, the Mystic poet of the 13th century also wrote about. As a therapist, my work, as I see it is to bring fluidity and flow between the two types of attention (narrow and focused) and (wide and open). Thank you again 🙏🏼
Was thinking exactly the same myself. It such a perfect argument crushing the mainstream scientific paradigm as is Rupert Sheldrakes banned Ted Talk and Graham Hancock and Russel Targ.
I used to hear this phrase “ anyone with half a brain can see that “ in the late 80s … and the integration of the two hemispheric styles of function is precisely where my thoughts would contextualize if the “anyone” had only possessed a complete whole brain. I thought this was forgiveness or passiveness on my part… but the state of the world would eventually take notice of my left brain style and I would under implement the right brain reliance. I needed that part of me just to integrate my parts into the whole and my whole as a part of the world. Bless you sir - then his closing statement blows me away just blown a way
i sometimes experience these states of "the world is so simple, i understand it all" which then go to "i know nothing except the experience of being here, along my past one's, memories", which is very well explained by left and right hemisphere attention tendencies, and how sometimes one is dominant and the other times the other. I have found myself increasingly "trying" to use, what now I know to be, the right hemisphere as I found the left dull, while the right - limitless in its dynamic range. A brilliant talk by a brilliant mind.
Much of what Iain McGilchrist has to say is recognized and known by our right hemispheres. Unfortunately most of the loud voices in our culture shout from the left hemisphere so that their 'logic' wont be questioned. Unfortunately (and fortunately) the right hemisphere is tentative by its very nature so that it is able to explore without being stuck in a cul de sac. We need to give ourselves more down time so that we can integrate our right hemisphere wanderings.
Surely now the most important and difficult question must be this: how on earth can we know when to let the right or left hemispheres loose? My guess is that we can't know, and therefore, that generally we will only find out what we should have done in retrospect.
6 minutes in and I can see where he is headed here. Ive always said this using the metaphor of a painting or a piece of music. I can't zoom in to a specific point in a painting and discern what the painting is, its comprised of its parts. This seems blatantly obvious, however I believe the goals and ambitions of science are not to merely dwell on the "specific point" in the painting that is our universe, but the hope and wish that one day we WILL be able to to either zoom out, or take those bits and construct the picture in its entirety. To see and understand the connections or the interconnections. Such as when the Scottish James Maxwell saw the connections between electricity,mangnatism and light. My first realization that reductionism is not an answer left me saddened and hopeless for the scientific enterprise, but I have changed,because even if we never in my lifetime or generations after do have the cohesive view of he complexity and interrelation of the world around us, the time spent will not be fruitless and frivolous.
As a person with 0.5 brain...right hemisphere overwhelms tooooo much... l so agree, it's disaster. And it is only half brain, cz too much distorts balance, while overwhelming within certain norm, doesn't. I know for sure, as l was observed by many, who's opinion matters, same conclusion every time. I knew at 13 when the fuss within teachers started...didn't know about the fuss and their conclusions yet....and several times later on in life. ...and its bit too late..So, yes anyone with only half the brain knows.
This guy must love nicola tesla. Never wrote down a equation, understanding electricity came as natural to him as if it was his blood. I bet he never thought out any models of the universe or so.
This depends on ones definition of "utility." Ancient cultures "prizing beauty" may have been paying homage to "fertility" as opposed to "beauty," and sacrifices to a Fertility Goddess are far more Utilitarian in that context. What could possibly be the Utilitarian value of a $250,000,000 Van Gogh painting, or even of a $25 print of same? Why do we "prize" art, or even cheap reproductions? Thus, his referencing of utility depends on a barriw definition of Utilitarian, such as a Fork, used to eat. But, if you have the extra money, most may choose some rather more "attractive" fork over the type used in most inexpensive restaurants. Jordan Peterson has been engrossed in this topic for decades: What do we mean by words such as "meaning" or "purpose," and his Maps of Meaning course is very interesting as well. ☮️
Before you get carried away just take a while to reflect on what he claims and in particular the evidence he supplies. He is wonderfully persuasive and he's delivering a message we want to hear. That deserves an Amber warning at least. Look carefully at the examples he uses. His interpretations are not the only ones possible nor necessarily the best. His Pax6 example is woeful. I've picked out a number of examples and constructed different kinds of interpretation. It's not difficult! His evidence then becomes his interpretation of the evidence, which is at the very least suspect. He is a good guy and there is some truth in his message but he is no panacea for all the worlds ills.
While I do agree that our mind has different functions for each of its hemispheres, and in fact for different smaller parts of the brain, the guest doesn't seem to me to have solid arguments to as why we can't use both the left and the right hemispheres in harmony, even if not always simultaneously. He seems instead to over-state the "devastating effects" of using reason to advance humanity (and let's face it, we're so much better off as a species than we've ever been, on average), and seems to have a lot of confirmation bias attached to his arguments and theories. Yes, we need to learn how to be more empathetic, build better relationships, appreciate more art and culture, and understand the world as a whole, but that can be done by using both of our hemispheres, and there is no need to ridicule the left H, just to confirm your theories. All in all, his theory seems very compelling because he bases it on the scientific fact that our hemispheres have different functions, but then simply goes to make unscientific claims about how the world works based on this. Be critical. It's a slippery slope.
The problem with McGilchrist is that he is claiming a revolution of thought simply for redressing the two hemishpere view and then the contentions theory of panpsychism, after which he adopts a humanist critique of philosophy. This will impress people who are don't know the subject very well.
he's trying to condense his 20 years of research and a 450pages long book into a 20min talk. If you want some context, maybe read the book, it has 150pages of sources and footnotes attached...
“Rabbit's clever," said Pooh thoughtfully. "Yes," said Piglet, "Rabbit's clever." "And he has Brain." "Yes," said Piglet, "Rabbit has Brain." There was a long silence. "I suppose," said Pooh, "that that's why he never understands anything.” (Rabbit must be left-brain-dominant) ;)
I don't know if this guy knows something and is trying to explain to us as best as he can or just trying to pretend that he knows something that we don't.
The machine analogy for life is deeply flawed. When life is viewed as a machine then it can be judged broken and in need of being fixed. Most unfortunately, the machine analogy gives the false notion that nature can be improved and humans can "progress" towards some technological utopia.
Is this just figuratively speaking though. Is he really just describing two ways of perceiving the world. Pointing out that the one in vogue (some kind of obsession with the rational, objective, and scientific i.e. Modernism), is a limited view. I doubt the left hemisphere of the Human mind really is a source of this sort of thinking; and the right hemisphere, something more holistic.
Look up Sperry and Gazzaniga's famous research on 'split brain' patients. Sperry won a Nobel Prize for it before he passed away, but Gazzaniga is still around and speaks eloquently about the results, also available on several TH-cam vids.
![[LIVE] : ONE ลุมพินี 85 | คู่เอก "ยอดเหล็กเพชร vs ผึ้งหลวง"](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Qq_19bnnxEo/mqdefault.jpg)
One of the greatest thinkers of our time.
Anyone from Jordan Peterson´s Discovering Personality?
Yes 🙂
A bit late but yes! :) Haven't seen the documentary yet. Have you? Is it worth it?
Harro, yess here.
Yes ❗Roughly speaking
Yes lecture notes 1.
Why isn't this the # 1 Ted Talk..?????.....This is way better than the bilge they'e currently got slated in the top ten....
The greatest TED talk ever given.
Absolutely outstanding! LET'S RESIST UNIFORMITY and BE SCEPTICAL, you're not a machine. Thanks for this!
Wow I've been saying this for years! I think most people are aware of these things but they lack the platform to talk about it. Only just discovered McGilchrest but I hope he makes it to the mainstream.
This is one of the best books I've read in a long time. Could hardly put it down.
Much of what Mcgilchrist writes about I have been thinking, obviously, not as knowledgeably and technically as gilchrist - for at least the last 5 years. There is obviously a dichotomy within ourselves, what Buber conceived as the difference between relating in the manner of "I-thou' and "I-It". Mcgilchrist shreds the idea that what we give language to - how we describe the world - is the world itself, as opposed to emphasizing one aspect while pushing into the background other aspects.
Language and the skills of the left hemisphere are deceptively powerful in the sense that, if you aren't aware of what language is doing - the "constructive" purpose of it, which allows us to fix and manipulate external things - it'll eventually become your sole way of understanding things.
I'm reminded of how retarded this way of thinking can make you by the story of the eminent behaviorist John Watson. The right brain knows how to raise children - whether it be thought of as our mammalian need to nurture and care for our young, or a strong psychological feeling one has to be good and nurturing with your child - however it is cognized or understood by the parent, the intuitive response is "attachment". The right brain establishes emotional connection, closeness and security in relationships. However, Watson was living during the heyday of left-brain behaviorism. To him, and to many scientists today, emotions are "yucky" "contemptible" "subhuman" "embarrassing" - basic feelings that no doubt underlie their cognitive judgements. So, John Watson wrote a book on how to parent; in it, he recommends that parents not hug their children, not show any emotional connection, in essence, because in his view, children "appeared to love" their parents, not because it was an ingrained emotional need of every mammal, but because children recognized (a left brain assumption) that parents give them things i.e. food, shelter etc. To make a long story short, his daughter attempted suicide on multiple occasions and his son succeeded in killing himself.
As Daniel Goleman argues, emotional intelligence is more important than a "cognitive intelligence" i.e a left brained mechanistic view, since the former is simply wiser than the latter. Scientists who subscribe to a left brain mechanistic worldview simply dont have the emotional maturity - awareness - to realize that they are following the path forewarned by Aldous Huxleys brave new world.
I enjoyed your comment Mike, but that we should favour one hemisphere's way over that of the other sounds, paradoxically, like an idea the left would like most (; they are (and should be) fundamentally entangled. though the balance sure seems a little off, and not to the right side... poor Watson - and his children(
Paul Cavaciuti - I agree.
Yes, isn't it yaky to have contempt towards emotions, true attachment and seeing them as subhuman and embarrassing. Ironically, l wrote 'to feel contempt' ...then deleted...hahaha.
I was/am always wondering what this left-right story had to do with psychopathy...and ...haha to politics, seriously
@@alinashron5051 Yes, mine is bit..a lot..off to the right/wrong side, cz it's not a bit. Agree, but wonder what too much of left/wrong results. Fusinating.
Wow! What a brilliant comment. I thoroughly enjoyed reading it. Very insightful.
How this hasn’t got millions of views baffles me ❤
🙏❤️🌍🕊🎵🎶
"The Matter and His Emissary,"
The Divided Brain and the Making of the Western World,
"The Matter With Things," The Divided Brain and the Unmaking of the Western World." (2 volumes) by Dr.Iain McGilchrist and lectures on TH-cam. There are many discussions in various fields with discussions about these issues enlightening our world.
People love stupidity. That's why.
Thank you Dr Mcgilchirst, what an amazing presentation on a vert vital topic, especially given the times we are living through. As a particle physicist, I struggled with the reductionist approach of science, reducing the world to a handful of particles and forces, which at the end of the day, make up a very small fraction of the universe, the rest which are labelled 'dark matter/energy'. What you speak about, this dance between being a part of and apart from, is something that Rumi, the Mystic poet of the 13th century also wrote about. As a therapist, my work, as I see it is to bring fluidity and flow between the two types of attention (narrow and focused) and (wide and open). Thank you again 🙏🏼
I'm surprised this talk wasn't banned by TED! Iain McGilchrist is brilliant!
Was thinking exactly the same myself. It such a perfect argument crushing the mainstream scientific paradigm as is Rupert Sheldrakes banned Ted Talk and Graham Hancock and Russel Targ.
Yes but Ian's friend Rupert Sheldrake's TED Talk was
‘Beauty and complexity over utility’. The riddle of life.
I used to hear this phrase “ anyone with half a brain can see that “ in the late 80s … and the integration of the two hemispheric styles of function is precisely where my thoughts would contextualize if the “anyone” had only possessed a complete whole brain. I thought this was forgiveness or passiveness on my part… but the state of the world would eventually take notice of my left brain style and I would under implement the right brain reliance. I needed that part of me just to integrate my parts into the whole and my whole as a part of the world. Bless you sir - then his closing statement blows me away just blown a way
This gentlemen will go down in history as one of the best ever philosopher/scientists.
i sometimes experience these states of "the world is so simple, i understand it all" which then go to "i know nothing except the experience of being here, along my past one's, memories", which is very well explained by left and right hemisphere attention tendencies, and how sometimes one is dominant and the other times the other. I have found myself increasingly "trying" to use, what now I know to be, the right hemisphere as I found the left dull, while the right - limitless in its dynamic range.
A brilliant talk by a brilliant mind.
This video is Great!!! Speaks volumes in 2021. 👍 👌
In 2023 as well!
A timely warning against simple, left brain thinking and the arrogance of certain knowledge.
This book is his “To Pimp a Butterfly.” Ten years later...I’ve been reading it since it came out! It should be here at home again today...
This man is brilliant ⭐
Much of what Iain McGilchrist has to say is recognized and known by our right hemispheres. Unfortunately most of the loud voices in our culture shout from the left hemisphere so that their 'logic' wont be questioned. Unfortunately (and fortunately) the right hemisphere is tentative by its very nature so that it is able to explore without being stuck in a cul de sac. We need to give ourselves more down time so that we can integrate our right hemisphere wanderings.
Surely now the most important and difficult question must be this: how on earth can we know when to let the right or left hemispheres loose? My guess is that we can't know, and therefore, that generally we will only find out what we should have done in retrospect.
Brilliant analysis of this quagmire of the ages!
6 minutes in and I can see where he is headed here. Ive always said this using the metaphor of a painting or a piece of music. I can't zoom in to a specific point in a painting and discern what the painting is, its comprised of its parts. This seems blatantly obvious, however I believe the goals and ambitions of science are not to merely dwell on the "specific point" in the painting that is our universe, but the hope and wish that one day we WILL be able to to either zoom out, or take those bits and construct the picture in its entirety. To see and understand the connections or the interconnections. Such as when the Scottish James Maxwell saw the connections between electricity,mangnatism and light. My first realization that reductionism is not an answer left me saddened and hopeless for the scientific enterprise, but I have changed,because even if we never in my lifetime or generations after do have the cohesive view of he complexity and interrelation of the world around us, the time spent will not be fruitless and frivolous.
Amen to That Bro. Gilchrist !
❤ Bravo! ❤
As a person with 0.5 brain...right hemisphere overwhelms tooooo much... l so agree, it's disaster. And it is only half brain, cz too much distorts balance, while overwhelming within certain norm, doesn't. I know for sure, as l was observed by many, who's opinion matters, same conclusion every time. I knew at 13 when the fuss within teachers started...didn't know about the fuss and their conclusions yet....and several times later on in life. ...and its bit too late..So, yes anyone with only half the brain knows.
Jordan Peterson lead me to this speaker. Awesome!
Outstanding!
Fascinating talk
Really like listening to him
I think this is akin to Alan Watts’ lectures about the mechanical view of the universe versus ‘the dance’.
This guy must love nicola tesla. Never wrote down a equation, understanding electricity came as natural to him as if it was his blood. I bet he never thought out any models of the universe or so.
14 mins onwards: such a good rant. go on lain!
Awesome talk :)
Beautiful
Great talk! :D
a literal duality of neural structuring of our brain? its like the experiential evidence for interdependence is seemingly self arising.
whyyyyyy does this only have 728 likes? whyyyyyyyyyyy?
That just sounds like Alan Watts with extra steps.
Excellent!
so brilliant
Don't Grasp, Don't Cling!
Why did I feel scared watching this
Probably for a similar reason that the "comedy" Idiocracy scares me.
It syndrome of half brain.
This depends on ones definition of "utility." Ancient cultures "prizing beauty" may have been paying homage to "fertility" as opposed to "beauty," and sacrifices to a Fertility Goddess are far more Utilitarian in that context.
What could possibly be the Utilitarian value of a $250,000,000 Van Gogh painting, or even of a $25 print of same? Why do we "prize" art, or even cheap reproductions?
Thus, his referencing of utility depends on a barriw definition of Utilitarian, such as a Fork, used to eat. But, if you have the extra money, most may choose some rather more "attractive" fork over the type used in most inexpensive restaurants.
Jordan Peterson has been engrossed in this topic for decades: What do we mean by words such as "meaning" or "purpose," and his Maps of Meaning course is very interesting as well.
☮️
Here's another brilliant interview with Iain Mcgilchrist on the divided brain: /watch?v=SVM5nufv6Fs&t=404s
Before you get carried away just take a while to reflect on what he claims and in particular the evidence he supplies. He is wonderfully persuasive and he's delivering a message we want to hear. That deserves an Amber warning at least. Look carefully at the examples he uses. His interpretations are not the only ones possible nor necessarily the best. His Pax6 example is woeful. I've picked out a number of examples and constructed different kinds of interpretation. It's not difficult! His evidence then becomes his interpretation of the evidence, which is at the very least suspect. He is a good guy and there is some truth in his message but he is no panacea for all the worlds ills.
Eloquent
While I do agree that our mind has different functions for each of its hemispheres, and in fact for different smaller parts of the brain, the guest doesn't seem to me to have solid arguments to as why we can't use both the left and the right hemispheres in harmony, even if not always simultaneously.
He seems instead to over-state the "devastating effects" of using reason to advance humanity (and let's face it, we're so much better off as a species than we've ever been, on average), and seems to have a lot of confirmation bias attached to his arguments and theories.
Yes, we need to learn how to be more empathetic, build better relationships, appreciate more art and culture, and understand the world as a whole, but that can be done by using both of our hemispheres, and there is no need to ridicule the left H, just to confirm your theories.
All in all, his theory seems very compelling because he bases it on the scientific fact that our hemispheres have different functions, but then simply goes to make unscientific claims about how the world works based on this.
Be critical. It's a slippery slope.
Definitely not the audience for this kind of talk 🤷♂
The problem with McGilchrist is that he is claiming a revolution of thought simply for redressing the two hemishpere view and then the contentions theory of panpsychism, after which he adopts a humanist critique of philosophy. This will impress people who are don't know the subject very well.
I didn't understand the main idea of this talk. It seemed like Iain just stated general truths about balance.
he's trying to condense his 20 years of research and a 450pages long book into a 20min talk. If you want some context, maybe read the book, it has 150pages of sources and footnotes attached...
👏👏👏👏👏👏
“Rabbit's clever," said Pooh thoughtfully.
"Yes," said Piglet, "Rabbit's clever."
"And he has Brain."
"Yes," said Piglet, "Rabbit has Brain."
There was a long silence.
"I suppose," said Pooh, "that that's why he never understands anything.”
(Rabbit must be left-brain-dominant) ;)
I don't know if this guy knows something and is trying to explain to us as best as he can or just trying to pretend that he knows something that we don't.
i bet nearly if not all did not get the whole or Essen of his massage....
you look ( think )through a hole
but you miss the whole.....
still dead duck
👁👀👁🗨
The machine analogy for life is deeply flawed. When life is viewed as a machine then it can be judged broken and in need of being fixed. Most unfortunately, the machine analogy gives the false notion that nature can be improved and humans can "progress" towards some technological utopia.
Nut if you asking me I can telling WHY i thing!
WHere is my intellectual RIGHT
Is this just figuratively speaking though. Is he really just describing two ways of perceiving the world. Pointing out that the one in vogue (some kind of obsession with the rational, objective, and scientific i.e. Modernism), is a limited view. I doubt the left hemisphere of the Human mind really is a source of this sort of thinking; and the right hemisphere, something more holistic.
Look up Sperry and Gazzaniga's famous research on 'split brain' patients. Sperry won a Nobel Prize for it before he passed away, but Gazzaniga is still around and speaks eloquently about the results, also available on several TH-cam vids.
lol never mind
boriiiinnnnnnnnng
boring to small-minded zombies!