Stan and Ollie - Quareness Series (8th "Lecture").
Apart from the natural left handers (who are said to have the opposite orientation) we are told that the left side of the human brain controls speech function, logic and reason, and the right side looks after recognition of shapes and patterns, musical appreciation and recognising faces. In a sense we could say that the left brain is a scientist and the right an artist. It's also asserted that the right side of the body is controlled by the brain's left side and vice versa, although it's not clear why - maybe it's nature's way of preventing internal "frontier disputes"? In short we appear to have at least two brains (there may also be a third sorta robotic one not specifically located in any physical sub sector but rather spread out all over) with the perhaps alarming possibility that we are each truly more than one entity e.g. the person/scientist you call "you" living in the left half of your skull - the half coping with the "real" world - and the stranger/artist living in the right half who we are scarcely aware of except when in moods of deep relaxation or inspiration. Hypnotism appears to impressively validate this hypothesis.... the left brain (everyday self) is put to sleep leaving the right side wide awake, and under these conditions the right can harbour demonstrably extraordinary powers.
During the Pleistocene epoch (which started about a million and a half years ago) man put on an evolutionary spurt and began to outdistance all the other animals. The new man (homo habilis) had a brain that was half as big again as his immediate predecessor, australopithecus. The next million years saw the emergence of homo erectus (steady on there at the back) whose brain was twice as big as australopithecus. Then a "brain explosion" began kinda suddenly about half a million years ago. No one knows why, but the brain of homo erectus expanded by another third until it reached the size of the thinkbox of modern man (about 3 lbs). One "colourful" theory is that this occurred because at some point woman ceased to be "seasonal" and became receptive to the male at all times, probably as a result of hunters being absent for weeks at a time and expecting sex when they returned - the women who "didn't mind" produced more children until "seasonality" was bred out of the human species (a tale aka the "romantic" version of evolution).
The combination of such motivation (first choice of females) and intelligence and bravery (also required of the hunter) may well have been the cause of the brain explosion mentioned, which kicked off at the same time as the last great ice age (500,000 years ago) and lasted until the end of the Pleistocene, a relatively recent 10,000 years back. The periodic advance and retreat of the ice may indeed also have acted as a spur to man's development forcing him to struggle harder.
A bone discovered at Pech de L'Azé in the South of France and dating from 200,000 years ago contains the first known engraving. Its purpose was probably "magical", like with the cave drawings of Cro Magnon man (175,000 years later), in order to lure animals into ambush i.e. earlier mankind was already then trying to "control" nature and since magic suggests some kind of religion, he had presumeably developed a primitive cosmology based on a sense of "oneness with the universe" (a right brain characteristic). We can then reasonably deduce that our ancestors of that time already possessed human intelligence but essentially of the right brain type. Now we know you cannot create what we call real science with right brain intelligence because our science requires a storage system for knowledge - symbols, ideas, writing. Nevertheless our right brain intelligence can take us a long way in the knowing stakes. Where modern man uses science our Cro Magnon ancestors used magic and their "scientists" were priests and shamans largely distinguished by "second sight". In the pursuit of knowledge what may turn out to be most advantageous is the cooperative collaboration of both these perspectives.
In his book "The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind" the author Julian Jaynes sets out his belief that our primitive ancestors heard "voices" speaking from the right brain, which they assumed to be gods, and that the historical evidence shows this ancient "oneness with the universe" began to vanish as recently as 1200 BC. He also believes it was at this time - when man became separated from the "other self" - that cruelty first entered our human history. When man began to be trapped in his left brain he started overreacting to problems with impatience and violence. There may have been a cataclysmic trigger (such as a large natural disaster) and under all the stress the old childlike mentality could no longer cope. Whatever the cause man became increasingly cruel and destructive as his intellect "developed".
Another author Graham Phillips in "The End of Eden - The Comet that Changed Civilisation" points out that in 1486 BC the earth's path passed through the tail of a comet "be the name of" 12P/Pons-Brooks, and many major civilisations which until that time had been peaceful and stable, now fell victim to war and mass slaughter. He suggests that 12P released some toxic substance possibly containing the fight-or-flight hormone vasopressin, which in large doses would produce violence. The bad news is that this comet is apparently due to return to our neighbourhood in 2024 i.e. if the so called Planet X doesn't "do for us" beforehand this year or next (doh).
Of course not all men became more cruel and violent. Look at some of the Greeks who developed in a different direction, enjoying thinking for its own sake e.g. yer man Socrates standing on the same spot for 24 hours while he worked out a problem in his head, or Plato in his dialogues revealing a man believing that ideas are the pathway to the infinite (essentially a right brain mystical vision). On the other hand Aristotle (Plato's pupil) went off on a different tack again, concerned with the observation of nature and the accumulation of facts, and ultimately it was he who exercised the greatest influence on the development of the western mind. Although religion had provided man with a sense of order and purpose and of living in a universe he understood and in which he occupied a special place, the rise of the scientific method served to undermine the picture of God in heaven looking down on his creatiion and occasionally intervening in history. As a consequence a new kind of philosophy (starting point = doubting everything) came to the fore (Descartes) which soon exposed western man to the scepticism of David Hume and to Kant's belief that we can never know the reality that lies behind phenomena.
But somehow this approach has left a niggling legacy of dissatisfaction.....a missing link so to speak.
Now you might at this stage be wondering where does Laurel and Hardy come into the picture. Well we might liken Ollie to the dominant, objective and more aggressive mind (= you or ego) and the smaller more fuzzy Stan to the subjective mind (= hidden you or underlying spirit). If you wake up feeling low and discouraged Ollie tends to transmit your depression to Stan (as it happens the latter is in control of your energy supply) who then fails to send you energy, which makes you feel lower than ever. Maybe this vicious circle is the real cause of most mental illness? Neurosis for example might be a form of self hypnosis with Stan and Ollie obstructing one another rather than providing mutual support. On the other hand as soon as we experience an optimistic state of mind, Stan and Ollie begin to demonstrate what they can do in a more positive relation.....should Ollie experience a flash of happiness, that sends a positive message to Stan who promptly responds with a surge of energy which in turn reinforces Oliie's good feeling, and his optimism makes Stan send up still more energy - in effect a reinforcing positive loop rather than the downer of "dem negative vibes".
In the process of writing you can become conscious that your "other self" is churning up ideas and inspirations, while you (left brain) catch them and turn them into images or words..."painting with words". And the right, delighted to see how well you've caught its meaning, gives positive feedback upon which you proceed to write better. It's like a couple or team in synch, cooperating perfectly. And suddenly Stan ceases to be invisible, you know he exists and that with his cooperation there is almost nothing you can't do. And with such awareness this normally hidden ally can be trusted not to let you down.
Another apt example is that of an outstanding sportsperson operating "in the zone" - say the late great George Best who, when asked to explain "how he did it", would merely admit that he (ego) didn't really know how. All he knew is that the available energy and time seemed to expand for him and he always experienced plenty of both in that "flow" state (again we can see at work here a reinforcing positive loop between the two "half brains").
Finally it's quite a sobering thought that the "outside world" too may reflect this internal process. The history of what we today call the developed world would seem to suggest the onward march of the ego to the disadvantage of the spirit side, this ego which underpins all our major modern societal institutions - culture, economics, military, politics, religion, sport, trade However, I suspect that in the long run nature always tends toward balance and the pendulum may now be due to swing back from the extreme shores of the egotistic mentality.
Ladies and gentlemen it's time to start tapping into those largely unexercised parts of our thinking apparatus, with due deference to both the artistic and the scientific, and to give Stan and Ollie their proper due in the stirring saga of human evolution.
Sean.
Dean of Quareness.
June 2011.
During the Pleistocene epoch (which started about a million and a half years ago) man put on an evolutionary spurt and began to outdistance all the other animals. The new man (homo habilis) had a brain that was half as big again as his immediate predecessor, australopithecus. The next million years saw the emergence of homo erectus (steady on there at the back) whose brain was twice as big as australopithecus. Then a "brain explosion" began kinda suddenly about half a million years ago. No one knows why, but the brain of homo erectus expanded by another third until it reached the size of the thinkbox of modern man (about 3 lbs). One "colourful" theory is that this occurred because at some point woman ceased to be "seasonal" and became receptive to the male at all times, probably as a result of hunters being absent for weeks at a time and expecting sex when they returned - the women who "didn't mind" produced more children until "seasonality" was bred out of the human species (a tale aka the "romantic" version of evolution).
The combination of such motivation (first choice of females) and intelligence and bravery (also required of the hunter) may well have been the cause of the brain explosion mentioned, which kicked off at the same time as the last great ice age (500,000 years ago) and lasted until the end of the Pleistocene, a relatively recent 10,000 years back. The periodic advance and retreat of the ice may indeed also have acted as a spur to man's development forcing him to struggle harder.
A bone discovered at Pech de L'Azé in the South of France and dating from 200,000 years ago contains the first known engraving. Its purpose was probably "magical", like with the cave drawings of Cro Magnon man (175,000 years later), in order to lure animals into ambush i.e. earlier mankind was already then trying to "control" nature and since magic suggests some kind of religion, he had presumeably developed a primitive cosmology based on a sense of "oneness with the universe" (a right brain characteristic). We can then reasonably deduce that our ancestors of that time already possessed human intelligence but essentially of the right brain type. Now we know you cannot create what we call real science with right brain intelligence because our science requires a storage system for knowledge - symbols, ideas, writing. Nevertheless our right brain intelligence can take us a long way in the knowing stakes. Where modern man uses science our Cro Magnon ancestors used magic and their "scientists" were priests and shamans largely distinguished by "second sight". In the pursuit of knowledge what may turn out to be most advantageous is the cooperative collaboration of both these perspectives.
In his book "The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind" the author Julian Jaynes sets out his belief that our primitive ancestors heard "voices" speaking from the right brain, which they assumed to be gods, and that the historical evidence shows this ancient "oneness with the universe" began to vanish as recently as 1200 BC. He also believes it was at this time - when man became separated from the "other self" - that cruelty first entered our human history. When man began to be trapped in his left brain he started overreacting to problems with impatience and violence. There may have been a cataclysmic trigger (such as a large natural disaster) and under all the stress the old childlike mentality could no longer cope. Whatever the cause man became increasingly cruel and destructive as his intellect "developed".
Another author Graham Phillips in "The End of Eden - The Comet that Changed Civilisation" points out that in 1486 BC the earth's path passed through the tail of a comet "be the name of" 12P/Pons-Brooks, and many major civilisations which until that time had been peaceful and stable, now fell victim to war and mass slaughter. He suggests that 12P released some toxic substance possibly containing the fight-or-flight hormone vasopressin, which in large doses would produce violence. The bad news is that this comet is apparently due to return to our neighbourhood in 2024 i.e. if the so called Planet X doesn't "do for us" beforehand this year or next (doh).
Of course not all men became more cruel and violent. Look at some of the Greeks who developed in a different direction, enjoying thinking for its own sake e.g. yer man Socrates standing on the same spot for 24 hours while he worked out a problem in his head, or Plato in his dialogues revealing a man believing that ideas are the pathway to the infinite (essentially a right brain mystical vision). On the other hand Aristotle (Plato's pupil) went off on a different tack again, concerned with the observation of nature and the accumulation of facts, and ultimately it was he who exercised the greatest influence on the development of the western mind. Although religion had provided man with a sense of order and purpose and of living in a universe he understood and in which he occupied a special place, the rise of the scientific method served to undermine the picture of God in heaven looking down on his creatiion and occasionally intervening in history. As a consequence a new kind of philosophy (starting point = doubting everything) came to the fore (Descartes) which soon exposed western man to the scepticism of David Hume and to Kant's belief that we can never know the reality that lies behind phenomena.
But somehow this approach has left a niggling legacy of dissatisfaction.....a missing link so to speak.
Now you might at this stage be wondering where does Laurel and Hardy come into the picture. Well we might liken Ollie to the dominant, objective and more aggressive mind (= you or ego) and the smaller more fuzzy Stan to the subjective mind (= hidden you or underlying spirit). If you wake up feeling low and discouraged Ollie tends to transmit your depression to Stan (as it happens the latter is in control of your energy supply) who then fails to send you energy, which makes you feel lower than ever. Maybe this vicious circle is the real cause of most mental illness? Neurosis for example might be a form of self hypnosis with Stan and Ollie obstructing one another rather than providing mutual support. On the other hand as soon as we experience an optimistic state of mind, Stan and Ollie begin to demonstrate what they can do in a more positive relation.....should Ollie experience a flash of happiness, that sends a positive message to Stan who promptly responds with a surge of energy which in turn reinforces Oliie's good feeling, and his optimism makes Stan send up still more energy - in effect a reinforcing positive loop rather than the downer of "dem negative vibes".
In the process of writing you can become conscious that your "other self" is churning up ideas and inspirations, while you (left brain) catch them and turn them into images or words..."painting with words". And the right, delighted to see how well you've caught its meaning, gives positive feedback upon which you proceed to write better. It's like a couple or team in synch, cooperating perfectly. And suddenly Stan ceases to be invisible, you know he exists and that with his cooperation there is almost nothing you can't do. And with such awareness this normally hidden ally can be trusted not to let you down.
Another apt example is that of an outstanding sportsperson operating "in the zone" - say the late great George Best who, when asked to explain "how he did it", would merely admit that he (ego) didn't really know how. All he knew is that the available energy and time seemed to expand for him and he always experienced plenty of both in that "flow" state (again we can see at work here a reinforcing positive loop between the two "half brains").
Finally it's quite a sobering thought that the "outside world" too may reflect this internal process. The history of what we today call the developed world would seem to suggest the onward march of the ego to the disadvantage of the spirit side, this ego which underpins all our major modern societal institutions - culture, economics, military, politics, religion, sport, trade However, I suspect that in the long run nature always tends toward balance and the pendulum may now be due to swing back from the extreme shores of the egotistic mentality.
Ladies and gentlemen it's time to start tapping into those largely unexercised parts of our thinking apparatus, with due deference to both the artistic and the scientific, and to give Stan and Ollie their proper due in the stirring saga of human evolution.
Sean.
Dean of Quareness.
June 2011.