I parallel your opinions about this work- I think it enormously important. The doctors you highlighted have done brilliant developmental hemispheric work- thanks for the reference.

The first half of Dr. McGilchrist's book is vital- once read, it's quite difficult to not model thought and followon behavior as at least partially an integration of two interdependent perspectives. It's a valuable synthesis of wide-ranging related neurology, anthropology, linguistics, and psychology. These are connected using relatively straightforward logic into a powerful argument for hemispheric dimensionality in behavior. Yet the scientists are almost as stridently coarse as the masses they castigate on the subject of, say, right- and left-brained thinking. It disappoints to see articles like this one that don't engage the subject either at the proper level of detail or with a spirit of inquiry. It's as if there's an overarching question of some kind about bilaterality that's been settled. The attitude seems to be that of showing examples of so many flawed ideas on bilaterality that the notion is assumed to be false carte blanche.

More Posts