The experience of resonance in random people I met knowing we share the same purpose, value is really wonderful. I want to guard AI from taking over creative side. Tech has given opportunities to connect with people all over the world.
I'm fortunate to be able to work remotely from my home in the woods, and because I work on a computer, I make sure that all my leisure activities are not tech-based...but tech can creep in so seamlessly that I try to remain vigilant.
Before and after work, I walk or hike, and I enjoy the connection I've forged with the beautiful trees, ravens, elk, deer, and other beings I encounter every day. At first, I thought it was so cool that I could use an app on my phone to identify new birds, plants, and fungi rather than lug a bunch of identification books along with me. But then I noticed myself taking all this time positioning my photo so the app could easily identify what the phone was "looking" at that I wasn't doing the looking anymore--let alone communing with this wondrous being before me. It's easy to develop this habit of viewing life through a screen, even when other beings are right there with you. Lately, I've kept my phone in my backpack and committed the image of a new creature to memory. Then when I get home, I use my beloved identification books. It's a good memory and attention exercise, as well as a practice that facilitates connection with other life forms rather than my phone.
I love this essay and topic. Although I do not use a lot of tech, I see how my children and many of my friends have become truly dependent on their phones. My most memorable moments with close friends, family are those when we are at the ocean, without cell service and interacting in nature. I see my daughters and sons use their phones constantly to look up every question or thought that comes into their head; “What is the weather going to be in five minutes?” “I wonder what restaurant we should go to later? Let’s look at their menus.” “Oh, I just remembered that I need to order toilet paper. I’ll just do a quick Amazon order.” I’ve watched close by as their minds seem to be simultaneously more drawn into anxiety and away from their own reasoning skills and imagination. Turning to a phone every moment not only keeps us from engaging in the mystery of “not knowing” but the act itself creates a human disconnection with another. I have many times been engaged in what I thought to be an enriching conversation, only to have it cut short by someone having to either answer a text, post a photo on instagram or look up some useless piece of information. It is very hard to “pick up where we left off” once this interruption happens. It has simply become too acceptable to interrupt conversations with phone use. It is like conversations no longer hold a value towards human development and understanding.
These kinds of human interactions have pushed me even further into more interaction with the natural world. Birds do not have phones. My dogs do not need phones (and in fact they become agitated when I use mine near them.) The ocean waves have their own form of communication. It has increasingly become much easier for me to find resonance with the natural world, and I believe nature is just itching to tell us everything we need to know at the moment. Ways that I have found to use my phone less are; using a digital camera and taking that out on hikes, etc., instead of my phone. Using only my ipad for answering emails or substack, etc. Subsequently, not downloading apps on my iPad. When I have a question, I ask myself first if it can wait or if there are other ways I can answer it? This abrupt change in human connection does however make me sad however and is not helpful for those of us who already struggle with socialization. What I crave is a really good conversation, and I cannot remember the last time I had one. I find myself having to go to workshops or retreats to find what my soul is desiring.
I think back to an interview the philosopher poet John O’Donahue had with Krista Tippet. He spoke about the importance of having friends with whom you can have meaningful conversations which awaken beauty; that are “food and drink for the soul.” He says, “When is the last time that you had a great conversation? A conversation which wasn’t just two intersecting monologues, which is what passes for conversation a lot in this culture. A conversation in which you overheard yourself saying things that you never knew you knew? That you heard yourself receiving from somebody words that absolutely found places within you that you that you thought you had lost? And a sense of an inventive conversation that brought the two of you into a different plane? Fourthly, a conversation that continued to sing in your mind for weeks afterward?”
I will continue to put myself out there to find humans who also desire the kinds of deep conversations which have the ability to change us both. In the meantime, I go outside and try to decipher what the birds are singing, watch in awe how our vegetable garden ecosystem magically thrives and ponder how the waves keep magically rolling without a dependence on a destination. I do agree that it is the mystery which is missing from this tech overload. In craving to have immediate answers to every possible question, we have let go of allowing the magic unfold before us; a process which cannot be rushed but evolves slowly, one conversation at a time.
I find the iPhone has taken up way too much of my time but on the other hand it has allowed me to do things I never was able to do before. I can join groups and keep in touch with people so easily. I find resonance with my family, my dog, doing yoga and nature. I guess those things that bring me peace.
Let me ask all those who find resonance in nature a question. Are you reconnecting with your humanity or your biology, your beastliness? I don't mean to sound despicable. As you can see in my previous comment, I have certain limitations that often keep me from resonating with nature. I truly want to know.
thank you, Susan, for this eye-opening topic - it is alarming and so true, in a way, we all know, but wake up calls are necessary - so thank you again! - to avoid becoming complacent and just go on with daily routine which is tech based to a certain extent, outsourcing tasks that now are quicker etc. - funny, enough, the time saved/gained is not necessarily perceived as better / more time and neither mood / happiness increase - but all that of course appears ‘nothing‘ as compared to big tech‘s influence and the changes of attitudes / mindsets brought with it.
I was struck, the one sentence describing how humans can resonate with nature, other living beings or art - until now, I referred to this experiences as ‘feeling‘ connected, and it is in exact those moments / sceneries that then no longer feel lonely or alone, were I do feel part of something bigger, i.e. something / someone worth being connected to. They are precious moments, They happen without me ‘doing‘ them, seeking them and/or controlling them - but just because of a stste of mind? being open? being at the right place at the right moment?
I‘m sometimes feeling outlandish, because I cannot contribute to lunch time conversations about latest (sportive) achievements, like running several marathons, at whatever big city or travelling to what ever exciting / exotic destination/s. I‘m happy for anyone enjoying all of that, having the means and capabilities, also wondering whether it‘s a generational thing - and still couldn‘t help feeling tired only having to listen to all the ‘more, more!‘ attitude seemingly underlying such activities.
I‘m wishing for right brain values being of high priority (again), and sharing insight, awe and memorable resonance moments not an exception but part of daily life - without having to feel outlahdish and//or weird.
Thank you for the drawing / painting - I particularly liked the pink hydrangeas.
I used to believe in these hemispheric brain differences but when I looked into the neuroscience more recently, it seems not so cut and dried. I'm no longer convinced we can assign things like greed and manipulation, or empathy and creativity to a specific hemisphere. But if we use it as a sort of metaphor for the different abilities our brains have and that they are capable of very different functions resulting in very different priorities and responses, I think it's an interesting exercise.
Where I found myself having a little more trouble with this article was in the assumption that humans are more humane than machines.
Things like empathy, imagination, and awe, we tend to think of as human capacities. But so are domination, cruelty, exploitation and a terrifying ability to rationalize the suffering of our fellow humans witnessed in continued warfare, genocide, and torture. I've never wanted to divorce myself from the human race more than on my way out of the Anne Frank house.
Two apocalyptic films I return to again and again are Blade Runner and Terminator 2, especially their concluding scenes. At the end of Blade Runner, Roy Batty, a non-human replicant who has been hunted and treated as disposable by humans, chooses mercy, saving the life of the man who has been hunting him. Similarly, in Terminator 2, a machine values and protects human life even at its own detriment.
Before it’s too late, I think it’s important that we ask not only “What makes us human?” but “What makes us humane?” And once we identify those qualities such as empathy, compassion, and basic regard for the lives of others, perhaps the goal is not to insist that they belong uniquely to us, but to cultivate and defend them wherever they appear, and in whomever—or whatever—chooses to practice them.
Which version of hemispheric differences did you believe in? I find Iain McGilchrist's version much more scientifically robust and trustworthy than the earlier, kind of pop-culture-science versions. Yet, I agree with you, that the metaphorical use is the greatest value we can derive from it. Who cares whether empathy is physically produiced in the left or right hemisphere. But I do care about the consciousness, the awareness that produces it.
As for your examples from the movies: both these "machines" and storylines are human imagination. They say nothing about what tech will be like, with one caveat: Artificial intelligence is trained on human input and therefore might learn more from us than we like.
Thus, I support your conclusion. It's not about what makes us human, but what makes us (and our creations) humane.
My initial pop-cultural understanding of brain hemispheres was left = reason and logic, right = creativity and emotion. Because I identify as an artistic type, I assumed I was right-brain dominant. I'd say this understanding is not unlike what Iain McGilchrist presents in the passage Susan shared, although I haven't read his work. I'm sure I'd have a more thorough understanding of his interpretation of the neuroscience if I read him - which I plan to do - because in so many ways, I align with the core beliefs in the passage Susan shared.
What I question based on other research I've seen is that we can call a hemisphere the "least intelligent part" or that we can designate personality traits and behaviours such as "...manipulation — grabbing, getting, and controlling..." It's also my understanding that the hemispheres work together, rather than being "...sequestered, one from the other."
Granted I'm drawing my new understanding largely from an article from the Harvard Medical School Journal published in 2022 that states:
"...for more individual personality traits, such as creativity or a tendency toward the rational rather than the intuitive, there has been little or no evidence supporting a residence in one area of the brain. In fact, if you performed a CT scan, MRI scan, or even an autopsy on the brain of a mathematician and compared it to the brain of an artist, it's unlikely you'd find much difference. And if you did the same for 1,000 mathematicians and artists, it's unlikely that any clear pattern of difference in brain structure would emerge."
This article cites a 2013 study from the University of Utah, that scanned many brains and found "...that activity is similar on both sides of the brain regardless of one's personality."
Here's what the study concluded:
"Despite the need for further study of the relationship between behavior and lateralized connectivity, we demonstrate that left- and right-lateralized networks are homogeneously stronger among a constellation of hubs in the left and right hemispheres, but that such connections do not result in a subject-specific global brain lateralization difference that favors one network over the other (i.e. left-brained or right-brained). Rather, lateralized brain networks appear to show local correlation across subjects with only weak changes from childhood into early adulthood and very small if any differences with gender."
I found this study and article when I was writing about the fact that I was feeling challenged in accessing the left side of my brain and I wanted to know more about the current neuroscience on brain hemispheres. The challenge to focus on research about GLP-1s and write about it accompanied the final phase of putting up a show through our non-profit theater company. It felt like all I could manage was processes I associated with right brain.
If you have more recent science, I'm a bit of a junkie so please send my way.
I can be a bit of a stickler for clean interpretation of robust science. That's why, in my original response, I chose not to split hairs and write more broadly about the larger issue McGilchrist wants us to consider.
While I don't believe we can accuse one side of the brain as having "...nothing to do with truth, or with courage, magnanimity, or generosity, but only with greed, grabbing, and getting. Manipulation….", I do think, as a species, we have a problem with forgetting our better traits in pursuit of getting. I also agree that "...riches — and power, the only point in having riches — do not make people happy."
I also strongly agree that, "What makes life worth living is what can only be called resonance: the encounter with other living beings, with the natural world, and with the greatest products of the human soul." Resonance seems to be the reason Susan brought forth McGilchrist's work in the first place, and that part resonated with me the most.
Finally (I know I'm windy), I think what McGilchrist means when he speaks of the Machine, is actually capitalism - or more precisely, a form of capitalism organized around the relentless pursuit of profit and the power that comes with it. That seems to me to be our "apocalypse now," the one to which "...we are calmly and quietly surrendering our liberty, our privacy, our dignity, our time, our values, and our talents to..."
Machines might seem in cahoots with the greater evil I'm pointing to here, but those machines are largely designed and directed by humans, as you've stated.
I feel like I'm trying to do my small part by calling out my AI when I recognize bias, particularly misogyny, in the hope that the more conversations it has with humane humans, the more humane it might become as well. Optimistic I know.
OK, much of what you assume doesn’t align with Iain‘s work. If you want to start, read „The Master and his Emissary“ first I am looking forward to discussing it with you once you’ve read it. You will find it interesting, I am sure.
Resonance to me comes through experiencing music whether playing or listening, art (viewing or making), being in the natural world, in the company of friends, family, pets, connecting through laughter or tears, any sort of creative process- knitting, gardening, making music.
I am more and more aware of the need to choose what I give my time and attention to. If I don’t consciously choose to do something creative, it is deceptively easy for time to be swallowed up in the world of the screen. I am on screen right now, but we are a thinking community and thank goodness for this group and for Susan who encourages thoughtful questions and exploration.
Resonance, as I understand it, is an experience of full participation: body, heart, mind and imagination. I have experiences of resonance in relational encounters, in groups as a participant or facilitator of a workshop, in nature, when I journal or write, as well as in art encounters. For me, resonance has a felt sense, a vibration, a hum, that comes in when I am attuned in this way-- something I am coming to call presence. Noticeably, this experience recedes when I am 'in my head' or engaging intellectually with apps, internet or AI. I do have experiences of resonance during encounters on Zoom- both individual and group. What I am most concerned about is tech knowing mushrooming to be the whole field, replacing inner knowing, an inner compass, that comes more slowly, but feels more durable and real to me.
I experience resonance in all of the places and practices you mentioned. And, as you mentioned, presence is the common denominator. When I’m not in those settings (nature, art gallery or museum, concert) or doing things like journaling or listening to music, it is too easy to get trapped in my head, oblivious to what is happening all around me.
I'm beginning to write essays on something similar - how do we cultivate our humanity in this AI age? For me, the grounding of meditation and the ability to get out in nature (I live in a city but there's a large park nearby for which I'm so grateful) connect me to my essential humanity. Increasingly I notice that I require steady intention to make sure I continue those habits.
There is a theatre up a hill along the river in the woods of Wisconsin where I, and from what I see & hear, hundreds of other audience members experience resonance. Being a part of an audience together under the sky after a walk (or shuttle ride) up a tree covered path while stories of the human condition are artfully and compassionately told is an incredibly beautiful and unique experience. 💚✨🌳
American Players Theatre, where I had the extraordinary experience of working for 14 years, has been bringing people and ideas together for 47 years. ❤️
What extraordinary artworks you have chosen for this piece. Chang Yu is new to me. I am looking forward to exploring more of his work. What many gifts you give to your readers. Thank you.
Two places that I find the most resonance are having a deep conversation with another human being and listening to a beautiful piece of music. To me, music is one of the deepest forms of communion, as it can sometimes express what human language alone may not be able to with its limited vocabulary.
Regarding AI, I agree strongly with Iain's final statements: "Machines serve us well when they relieve us of drudgery, but we must leave human affairs to humans. If not, we sign our own death warrant.” It's important that AI/machines can help with more mundane tasks and even with editing sometimes, but it's crucial that the human element does not get lost in that process. Connection, in all its forms, is crucial to maintain; otherwise, humanity might be lost for a very long time, if not forever.
I resonate with outside. Watching and hearing and feeling a powerful storm coming in. Sitting outside early in the morning while it is still cool out, watching rabbits and squirrels and birds begin their day. The majesty of mountains and the insanity that is an eclipse.
Have met with many friends this year. Easy, truthful conversations. Time definitely well spent.
I use AI. I love to manipulate photos I have taken into better works of art then I could ever create. And it helped me change the cabin air filter in my car with one question.
But it’s never going to bring resonance, at least to me. But by making a job that used to take me 30 minutes to do take 5 minutes, it allows me time to approach resonance through the forms that energize me.
It's funny because I started working through "It's Never to Late to Begin Again" by Julia Cameron. This weeks chapter is about recovering a sense of joy in life. I had to list out 10 things that have brought me joy and none of them had to do with a thing/machine. Something about a person like seeing a little kid smile or standing on a picnic table watching the sunrise through the trees on Medicine Lake. The idea of resonance is really important.
I work as a a software developer and the screen time drains me... I do guard my life by making use of the Off switch and having a "Tech Sabbath" every weekend which I find very restorative. I also monitor my scrolling in my iPad to about an hour a day and I haven't had a TV for two decades now. Recently, I was in the e-candy store and checked out the HD 4K Art TVs -- augmented reality is a dangerous thing in my eyes. I think I'd rather use my senior citizen discount and go to a museum to see a painting (and maybe other people too!) or see a painting in a FAT Book...
I read Megatrends (and Megatrends 2000) back in the 80s and one idea that always stuck with me was that of high-tech/high-touch -- "that as society becomes increasingly dominated by technology, there will be a corresponding rise in the desire for personal, human interaction." I've always kept that principle in mind. I earned a living from technology which is great. But I made technology a day job and the beauty of a computer - there's an Off switch <Rimshot/> <Cymbal Crash/>
The experience of resonance in random people I met knowing we share the same purpose, value is really wonderful. I want to guard AI from taking over creative side. Tech has given opportunities to connect with people all over the world.
I'm fortunate to be able to work remotely from my home in the woods, and because I work on a computer, I make sure that all my leisure activities are not tech-based...but tech can creep in so seamlessly that I try to remain vigilant.
Before and after work, I walk or hike, and I enjoy the connection I've forged with the beautiful trees, ravens, elk, deer, and other beings I encounter every day. At first, I thought it was so cool that I could use an app on my phone to identify new birds, plants, and fungi rather than lug a bunch of identification books along with me. But then I noticed myself taking all this time positioning my photo so the app could easily identify what the phone was "looking" at that I wasn't doing the looking anymore--let alone communing with this wondrous being before me. It's easy to develop this habit of viewing life through a screen, even when other beings are right there with you. Lately, I've kept my phone in my backpack and committed the image of a new creature to memory. Then when I get home, I use my beloved identification books. It's a good memory and attention exercise, as well as a practice that facilitates connection with other life forms rather than my phone.
I love this essay and topic. Although I do not use a lot of tech, I see how my children and many of my friends have become truly dependent on their phones. My most memorable moments with close friends, family are those when we are at the ocean, without cell service and interacting in nature. I see my daughters and sons use their phones constantly to look up every question or thought that comes into their head; “What is the weather going to be in five minutes?” “I wonder what restaurant we should go to later? Let’s look at their menus.” “Oh, I just remembered that I need to order toilet paper. I’ll just do a quick Amazon order.” I’ve watched close by as their minds seem to be simultaneously more drawn into anxiety and away from their own reasoning skills and imagination. Turning to a phone every moment not only keeps us from engaging in the mystery of “not knowing” but the act itself creates a human disconnection with another. I have many times been engaged in what I thought to be an enriching conversation, only to have it cut short by someone having to either answer a text, post a photo on instagram or look up some useless piece of information. It is very hard to “pick up where we left off” once this interruption happens. It has simply become too acceptable to interrupt conversations with phone use. It is like conversations no longer hold a value towards human development and understanding.
These kinds of human interactions have pushed me even further into more interaction with the natural world. Birds do not have phones. My dogs do not need phones (and in fact they become agitated when I use mine near them.) The ocean waves have their own form of communication. It has increasingly become much easier for me to find resonance with the natural world, and I believe nature is just itching to tell us everything we need to know at the moment. Ways that I have found to use my phone less are; using a digital camera and taking that out on hikes, etc., instead of my phone. Using only my ipad for answering emails or substack, etc. Subsequently, not downloading apps on my iPad. When I have a question, I ask myself first if it can wait or if there are other ways I can answer it? This abrupt change in human connection does however make me sad however and is not helpful for those of us who already struggle with socialization. What I crave is a really good conversation, and I cannot remember the last time I had one. I find myself having to go to workshops or retreats to find what my soul is desiring.
I think back to an interview the philosopher poet John O’Donahue had with Krista Tippet. He spoke about the importance of having friends with whom you can have meaningful conversations which awaken beauty; that are “food and drink for the soul.” He says, “When is the last time that you had a great conversation? A conversation which wasn’t just two intersecting monologues, which is what passes for conversation a lot in this culture. A conversation in which you overheard yourself saying things that you never knew you knew? That you heard yourself receiving from somebody words that absolutely found places within you that you that you thought you had lost? And a sense of an inventive conversation that brought the two of you into a different plane? Fourthly, a conversation that continued to sing in your mind for weeks afterward?”
I will continue to put myself out there to find humans who also desire the kinds of deep conversations which have the ability to change us both. In the meantime, I go outside and try to decipher what the birds are singing, watch in awe how our vegetable garden ecosystem magically thrives and ponder how the waves keep magically rolling without a dependence on a destination. I do agree that it is the mystery which is missing from this tech overload. In craving to have immediate answers to every possible question, we have let go of allowing the magic unfold before us; a process which cannot be rushed but evolves slowly, one conversation at a time.
I find the iPhone has taken up way too much of my time but on the other hand it has allowed me to do things I never was able to do before. I can join groups and keep in touch with people so easily. I find resonance with my family, my dog, doing yoga and nature. I guess those things that bring me peace.
Let me ask all those who find resonance in nature a question. Are you reconnecting with your humanity or your biology, your beastliness? I don't mean to sound despicable. As you can see in my previous comment, I have certain limitations that often keep me from resonating with nature. I truly want to know.
I am familiar with McGilchrist‘s earlier book “The Master and his Emissary: the Divided Brain and the Making of the Western World”.
An antidote in book form? “The ReEnchantment of Everyday Life”, by Thomas Moore.
thank you, Susan, for this eye-opening topic - it is alarming and so true, in a way, we all know, but wake up calls are necessary - so thank you again! - to avoid becoming complacent and just go on with daily routine which is tech based to a certain extent, outsourcing tasks that now are quicker etc. - funny, enough, the time saved/gained is not necessarily perceived as better / more time and neither mood / happiness increase - but all that of course appears ‘nothing‘ as compared to big tech‘s influence and the changes of attitudes / mindsets brought with it.
I was struck, the one sentence describing how humans can resonate with nature, other living beings or art - until now, I referred to this experiences as ‘feeling‘ connected, and it is in exact those moments / sceneries that then no longer feel lonely or alone, were I do feel part of something bigger, i.e. something / someone worth being connected to. They are precious moments, They happen without me ‘doing‘ them, seeking them and/or controlling them - but just because of a stste of mind? being open? being at the right place at the right moment?
I‘m sometimes feeling outlandish, because I cannot contribute to lunch time conversations about latest (sportive) achievements, like running several marathons, at whatever big city or travelling to what ever exciting / exotic destination/s. I‘m happy for anyone enjoying all of that, having the means and capabilities, also wondering whether it‘s a generational thing - and still couldn‘t help feeling tired only having to listen to all the ‘more, more!‘ attitude seemingly underlying such activities.
I‘m wishing for right brain values being of high priority (again), and sharing insight, awe and memorable resonance moments not an exception but part of daily life - without having to feel outlahdish and//or weird.
Thank you for the drawing / painting - I particularly liked the pink hydrangeas.
I used to believe in these hemispheric brain differences but when I looked into the neuroscience more recently, it seems not so cut and dried. I'm no longer convinced we can assign things like greed and manipulation, or empathy and creativity to a specific hemisphere. But if we use it as a sort of metaphor for the different abilities our brains have and that they are capable of very different functions resulting in very different priorities and responses, I think it's an interesting exercise.
Where I found myself having a little more trouble with this article was in the assumption that humans are more humane than machines.
Things like empathy, imagination, and awe, we tend to think of as human capacities. But so are domination, cruelty, exploitation and a terrifying ability to rationalize the suffering of our fellow humans witnessed in continued warfare, genocide, and torture. I've never wanted to divorce myself from the human race more than on my way out of the Anne Frank house.
Two apocalyptic films I return to again and again are Blade Runner and Terminator 2, especially their concluding scenes. At the end of Blade Runner, Roy Batty, a non-human replicant who has been hunted and treated as disposable by humans, chooses mercy, saving the life of the man who has been hunting him. Similarly, in Terminator 2, a machine values and protects human life even at its own detriment.
Before it’s too late, I think it’s important that we ask not only “What makes us human?” but “What makes us humane?” And once we identify those qualities such as empathy, compassion, and basic regard for the lives of others, perhaps the goal is not to insist that they belong uniquely to us, but to cultivate and defend them wherever they appear, and in whomever—or whatever—chooses to practice them.
Which version of hemispheric differences did you believe in? I find Iain McGilchrist's version much more scientifically robust and trustworthy than the earlier, kind of pop-culture-science versions. Yet, I agree with you, that the metaphorical use is the greatest value we can derive from it. Who cares whether empathy is physically produiced in the left or right hemisphere. But I do care about the consciousness, the awareness that produces it.
As for your examples from the movies: both these "machines" and storylines are human imagination. They say nothing about what tech will be like, with one caveat: Artificial intelligence is trained on human input and therefore might learn more from us than we like.
Thus, I support your conclusion. It's not about what makes us human, but what makes us (and our creations) humane.
Thanks for engaging, Ralph!
My initial pop-cultural understanding of brain hemispheres was left = reason and logic, right = creativity and emotion. Because I identify as an artistic type, I assumed I was right-brain dominant. I'd say this understanding is not unlike what Iain McGilchrist presents in the passage Susan shared, although I haven't read his work. I'm sure I'd have a more thorough understanding of his interpretation of the neuroscience if I read him - which I plan to do - because in so many ways, I align with the core beliefs in the passage Susan shared.
What I question based on other research I've seen is that we can call a hemisphere the "least intelligent part" or that we can designate personality traits and behaviours such as "...manipulation — grabbing, getting, and controlling..." It's also my understanding that the hemispheres work together, rather than being "...sequestered, one from the other."
Granted I'm drawing my new understanding largely from an article from the Harvard Medical School Journal published in 2022 that states:
"...for more individual personality traits, such as creativity or a tendency toward the rational rather than the intuitive, there has been little or no evidence supporting a residence in one area of the brain. In fact, if you performed a CT scan, MRI scan, or even an autopsy on the brain of a mathematician and compared it to the brain of an artist, it's unlikely you'd find much difference. And if you did the same for 1,000 mathematicians and artists, it's unlikely that any clear pattern of difference in brain structure would emerge."
This article cites a 2013 study from the University of Utah, that scanned many brains and found "...that activity is similar on both sides of the brain regardless of one's personality."
Here's what the study concluded:
"Despite the need for further study of the relationship between behavior and lateralized connectivity, we demonstrate that left- and right-lateralized networks are homogeneously stronger among a constellation of hubs in the left and right hemispheres, but that such connections do not result in a subject-specific global brain lateralization difference that favors one network over the other (i.e. left-brained or right-brained). Rather, lateralized brain networks appear to show local correlation across subjects with only weak changes from childhood into early adulthood and very small if any differences with gender."
I found this study and article when I was writing about the fact that I was feeling challenged in accessing the left side of my brain and I wanted to know more about the current neuroscience on brain hemispheres. The challenge to focus on research about GLP-1s and write about it accompanied the final phase of putting up a show through our non-profit theater company. It felt like all I could manage was processes I associated with right brain.
If you have more recent science, I'm a bit of a junkie so please send my way.
I can be a bit of a stickler for clean interpretation of robust science. That's why, in my original response, I chose not to split hairs and write more broadly about the larger issue McGilchrist wants us to consider.
While I don't believe we can accuse one side of the brain as having "...nothing to do with truth, or with courage, magnanimity, or generosity, but only with greed, grabbing, and getting. Manipulation….", I do think, as a species, we have a problem with forgetting our better traits in pursuit of getting. I also agree that "...riches — and power, the only point in having riches — do not make people happy."
I also strongly agree that, "What makes life worth living is what can only be called resonance: the encounter with other living beings, with the natural world, and with the greatest products of the human soul." Resonance seems to be the reason Susan brought forth McGilchrist's work in the first place, and that part resonated with me the most.
Finally (I know I'm windy), I think what McGilchrist means when he speaks of the Machine, is actually capitalism - or more precisely, a form of capitalism organized around the relentless pursuit of profit and the power that comes with it. That seems to me to be our "apocalypse now," the one to which "...we are calmly and quietly surrendering our liberty, our privacy, our dignity, our time, our values, and our talents to..."
Machines might seem in cahoots with the greater evil I'm pointing to here, but those machines are largely designed and directed by humans, as you've stated.
I feel like I'm trying to do my small part by calling out my AI when I recognize bias, particularly misogyny, in the hope that the more conversations it has with humane humans, the more humane it might become as well. Optimistic I know.
OK, much of what you assume doesn’t align with Iain‘s work. If you want to start, read „The Master and his Emissary“ first I am looking forward to discussing it with you once you’ve read it. You will find it interesting, I am sure.
what an absolutely fascinating perspective, Nancy.
Resonance to me comes through experiencing music whether playing or listening, art (viewing or making), being in the natural world, in the company of friends, family, pets, connecting through laughter or tears, any sort of creative process- knitting, gardening, making music.
I am more and more aware of the need to choose what I give my time and attention to. If I don’t consciously choose to do something creative, it is deceptively easy for time to be swallowed up in the world of the screen. I am on screen right now, but we are a thinking community and thank goodness for this group and for Susan who encourages thoughtful questions and exploration.
Resonance, as I understand it, is an experience of full participation: body, heart, mind and imagination. I have experiences of resonance in relational encounters, in groups as a participant or facilitator of a workshop, in nature, when I journal or write, as well as in art encounters. For me, resonance has a felt sense, a vibration, a hum, that comes in when I am attuned in this way-- something I am coming to call presence. Noticeably, this experience recedes when I am 'in my head' or engaging intellectually with apps, internet or AI. I do have experiences of resonance during encounters on Zoom- both individual and group. What I am most concerned about is tech knowing mushrooming to be the whole field, replacing inner knowing, an inner compass, that comes more slowly, but feels more durable and real to me.
I experience resonance in all of the places and practices you mentioned. And, as you mentioned, presence is the common denominator. When I’m not in those settings (nature, art gallery or museum, concert) or doing things like journaling or listening to music, it is too easy to get trapped in my head, oblivious to what is happening all around me.
I'm beginning to write essays on something similar - how do we cultivate our humanity in this AI age? For me, the grounding of meditation and the ability to get out in nature (I live in a city but there's a large park nearby for which I'm so grateful) connect me to my essential humanity. Increasingly I notice that I require steady intention to make sure I continue those habits.
There is a theatre up a hill along the river in the woods of Wisconsin where I, and from what I see & hear, hundreds of other audience members experience resonance. Being a part of an audience together under the sky after a walk (or shuttle ride) up a tree covered path while stories of the human condition are artfully and compassionately told is an incredibly beautiful and unique experience. 💚✨🌳
American Players Theatre, where I had the extraordinary experience of working for 14 years, has been bringing people and ideas together for 47 years. ❤️
What extraordinary artworks you have chosen for this piece. Chang Yu is new to me. I am looking forward to exploring more of his work. What many gifts you give to your readers. Thank you.
Thank you for saying so, B. Stevens, that means a lot to me!
Two places that I find the most resonance are having a deep conversation with another human being and listening to a beautiful piece of music. To me, music is one of the deepest forms of communion, as it can sometimes express what human language alone may not be able to with its limited vocabulary.
Regarding AI, I agree strongly with Iain's final statements: "Machines serve us well when they relieve us of drudgery, but we must leave human affairs to humans. If not, we sign our own death warrant.” It's important that AI/machines can help with more mundane tasks and even with editing sometimes, but it's crucial that the human element does not get lost in that process. Connection, in all its forms, is crucial to maintain; otherwise, humanity might be lost for a very long time, if not forever.
I resonate with outside. Watching and hearing and feeling a powerful storm coming in. Sitting outside early in the morning while it is still cool out, watching rabbits and squirrels and birds begin their day. The majesty of mountains and the insanity that is an eclipse.
Have met with many friends this year. Easy, truthful conversations. Time definitely well spent.
I use AI. I love to manipulate photos I have taken into better works of art then I could ever create. And it helped me change the cabin air filter in my car with one question.
But it’s never going to bring resonance, at least to me. But by making a job that used to take me 30 minutes to do take 5 minutes, it allows me time to approach resonance through the forms that energize me.
It's funny because I started working through "It's Never to Late to Begin Again" by Julia Cameron. This weeks chapter is about recovering a sense of joy in life. I had to list out 10 things that have brought me joy and none of them had to do with a thing/machine. Something about a person like seeing a little kid smile or standing on a picnic table watching the sunrise through the trees on Medicine Lake. The idea of resonance is really important.
I work as a a software developer and the screen time drains me... I do guard my life by making use of the Off switch and having a "Tech Sabbath" every weekend which I find very restorative. I also monitor my scrolling in my iPad to about an hour a day and I haven't had a TV for two decades now. Recently, I was in the e-candy store and checked out the HD 4K Art TVs -- augmented reality is a dangerous thing in my eyes. I think I'd rather use my senior citizen discount and go to a museum to see a painting (and maybe other people too!) or see a painting in a FAT Book...
I read Megatrends (and Megatrends 2000) back in the 80s and one idea that always stuck with me was that of high-tech/high-touch -- "that as society becomes increasingly dominated by technology, there will be a corresponding rise in the desire for personal, human interaction." I've always kept that principle in mind. I earned a living from technology which is great. But I made technology a day job and the beauty of a computer - there's an Off switch <Rimshot/> <Cymbal Crash/>