Falsifiability
Posted: Thu Apr 19, 2012 10:04 am
There is one issue that I would like to see explored more within the context of bicameral mind theory. That is the issue of falsifiability. Jaynes presented a great deal of evidence to corroborate his theory. Much of this evidence becomes quite convincing within the framework of bicameral mind theory. However, other explanations for such phenomena may also be convincing when viewed without the framework of the bicameral mind theory. In other words, bicameral mind theory has not succeeded in invalidating other theories which hold subjective consciousness to be much older than 3000 years. On a more positive note, however, it has provided some explanations for archaeological phenomena where no alternative explanations yet exist.
Do you think that it will ever be possible to use bicameral mind theory to refute other theories based on its superior evidence?
Secondly, I think that it might be useful to explore the falsifiability of bicameral mind theory, itself. Have we, for example, concluded that there is no evidence of any of the features of Jaynesian consciousness prior to the collapse of the Bronze Age? We have plenty of evidence indicating that a hallucinatory state of mind was at least a possibility prior to the Bronze Age collapse. Not suprisingly, we have evidence to show that subjective consciousness was present at the beginning of the Iron Age. However, are we certain that, aside from evidence of a hallucinatory mentality, there is absolutely no evidence of Jaynesian consciousness in what may be called the Bicameral Age?
Such evidence would not entirely falsify bicameral mind theory. However, it would at least suggest that the transition from bicamerality to consciousness may have been a more gradual shift rather than a purely catastrophic transformation. One might suggest that just as there are vestigial traces of bicamerality in the conscious era, perhaps consciousness may have been present in the bicameral era as well. Incidentally, I believe that Jaynes made reference to that possibility with regard to the case to Akhenaton.
Anyway, is anyone aware of any such evidence or could suggest other possible or actual evidence that would indicate falsifiability? I think that this is an important topic not because I seek to discredit the theory but because in withstanding such tests it would only be strengthened.
Do you think that it will ever be possible to use bicameral mind theory to refute other theories based on its superior evidence?
Secondly, I think that it might be useful to explore the falsifiability of bicameral mind theory, itself. Have we, for example, concluded that there is no evidence of any of the features of Jaynesian consciousness prior to the collapse of the Bronze Age? We have plenty of evidence indicating that a hallucinatory state of mind was at least a possibility prior to the Bronze Age collapse. Not suprisingly, we have evidence to show that subjective consciousness was present at the beginning of the Iron Age. However, are we certain that, aside from evidence of a hallucinatory mentality, there is absolutely no evidence of Jaynesian consciousness in what may be called the Bicameral Age?
Such evidence would not entirely falsify bicameral mind theory. However, it would at least suggest that the transition from bicamerality to consciousness may have been a more gradual shift rather than a purely catastrophic transformation. One might suggest that just as there are vestigial traces of bicamerality in the conscious era, perhaps consciousness may have been present in the bicameral era as well. Incidentally, I believe that Jaynes made reference to that possibility with regard to the case to Akhenaton.
Anyway, is anyone aware of any such evidence or could suggest other possible or actual evidence that would indicate falsifiability? I think that this is an important topic not because I seek to discredit the theory but because in withstanding such tests it would only be strengthened.