I agree about the minds of animals such as dogs being underappreciated. I suspect octopi are very aware and perhaps very individual in their reasoning and perspectives, not merely responding by instinct.

However, in Jayne's full written works, he lays out a case for consciousness being a phenomenon in different stages of deveolpment. In the bicameral mind stage, humans would have been much more similar inour perceptions and outlook to very clever animals.

Dogs, for example, equivalent to two year old children, are certainly perceptive and clever at striving for what they want. But they still tend to be easily manipulated by reward systems, stiil predictable in their reactions to stimuli. They live largely for the moment and, as far as we know, don't worry themselves over things like life goals, self-image and self-improvement, or integrity. Their instinctual drives seem more broadly to dictate their responses, unless countered by deliberate training.

We certainly have instincts, too. But to the extent we are aware of them, we can consciously choose to alter our course. Modern consciousness is perhaps most distinguished by our ability to be mindful, that is, reflective about ourselves

That last bit is by no means a perfect skill, nor do we exhibit it from birth. That capacity seems to develop at different rates and to differing extents in different people.

I wonder about the role of language itself in conscious thought. There are many concepts that, without language, would never see expression or outlet that anyone could adequately convey to others.

Excellent insights, especially re. The bias toward social elements of agricultural and post-ag societies, including autocratic leaders. Hunter gatherers, who are now a minisculr minority but for millenia represented all of humanity, never had such a thing as kings or chiefs, survival was, of necessity, a communal efforts, and gathering was more successful when group members spread out over a territory then shared the finds, so that no matter who had a banner haul on a given day, all shared in the spoils. Storage and hoarding were impractical to impossible, and therefore, so was wealth disparity.

I am most of the way through an excellent book that talks about this: Sex at Dawn: The Prehistoric Origins of Human Sexuality, by Christopher Ryan and Cacilda Jetha, 2010. This book is about far more than human sex; is has a ton to say about human social order, patriarchy vs matrifocal social structures, the phenomenon of wealth accumulation with the rise of aggricultural societies, and the subsequent subjugation of women and growth of violence as a social tactic among men. It also draws on zoology findings about humans' closest primate cousins to shed light on the fact that many of our assumptions about what is inherent for humans stems from cultural prejudices.

@MikeInBatonRouge Sex At Dawn is another wonderful book, and its implications are vast. One of the most significant, IMO, is the uncoupling of female libido from the estrus cycle, allowing females to enjoy sex whenever, not just when they are fertile. That book also makes the case, if not directly, then implicitly, that before patriarchy, women probably enjoyed group sex, and/or coupling with several men in an afternoon, possibly because a single male lover wasn't enough to satisfy the average horny female completely. Remember, the policing and control of female sexuality is one of the key features of patriarchy all around the world. Who knows what sexuality was really like in the age of the goddess?

@MikeInBatonRouge Another really good book along these same lines is The Alphabet vs the Goddess, in which Leonard Schlain (a practicing neurosurgeon) argues that historically, the development of the written word had a lot to do with the subjugation of women, because men wrote first, and often for many generations before women were allowed to write, and men wrote the laws which circumscribed female behavior, especially in the area of sex and procreation. Lots of other ideas in that book too, having to do with the functions of the two cerebral hemispheres.

@sunhatpat I will have to look for that one. So many books, so little time, (sigh, lol)

Sure. That would be a basis for agnostic theism. The bicameral mind "breakdown" theory of development of consciousness proposes an explanation for the personal impression of god speaking to one that does not resort to claims of actual supernatural forces. Reasonal and yet seemingly unprovable. It appeals to my own agnostic atheism.

Not sure your intent by that comment. Psychosis is a scientific fact. More than just schizophrenia, it also occures from prolonged sleep deprivation, injestion of verious chemicals, acute stress, and grief. The questions are:How does the brain do it? And is that a component of religious experience? The theory is intriguing, extensively developed, and as I said, probably untestable.

@MikeInBatonRouge Have you never heard someone say just before they fart, "pull my finger", then they fart?

@jlynn37 Sure. Still, your intended implication in this post's context is unclear to me.

@MikeInBatonRouge It's a joke!