This must have been a very difficult chapter to write. Here McGilchrist develops his argument that the right hemisphere has precedence, and underwrites the knowledge that the left hemisphere comes to have. He acknowledges that the difficulty is that since attention alters us, as well as what we attend to, and different ways of attending produce different realities, this will also affect our attention to the question of hemisphere difference. This must also, surely, relate to his choice of metaphor for the title of the book. As he says, ‘The metaphor we choose governs what we see’. On p.204 McGilchrist writes:

My choice of the Nietzschean fable of the Master and his emissary suggests that right at the heart of the relationship

between the hemispheres I see a power struggle between two unequal entities, and moreover one in which the inferior,

dependent party (the left hemisphere) starts to see itself as of primary importance.

I wonder which came first. The idea for the title of the book, or the idea of the power struggle between the hemispheres. Does it matter?

McGilchrist says that he will look at lines of evidence to establish the primacy of the right hemisphere, but at the same time knows that both science and philosophy come at the world from the left hemisphere’s point of view. So are his lines of evidence convincing?

McGilchrist has drawn on the work of philosophers and scientists to help make his case for the primacy of the right hemisphere, but his point is that the two hemisphere’s hold different concepts of truth. For the left hemisphere truth is coherence to what it already knows. But for the right hemisphere truth corresponds with something other than itself.

Existence of the ‘Other’ seems to lie at the heart of much of McGilchrist’s thinking, but there is no proof for this. He tellingly writes (p.196):

I take it that there is something that exists outside the mind. One has to have a starting point, and if you do not

believe at least that, I have nothing to say, not least because, if you are right, you are not there for me to say it to.

And he believes that

The relationship of our brains to that something whatever it is that exists apart from ourselves …… is reverberative,

that is to say, both receptive and generative – both picking up, receiving, perceiving, and in the process making,

giving back, creating ‘whatever it is that exists apart from ourselves but includes ourselves’.

So there we have it. We are either with him in this argument for the primacy of the right hemisphere, noting the evidence he provides, but also taking some of what he says on the basis of trust and our understanding of truth, or we are not.

This reminds me that somewhere I heard McGilchrist say that he had told Rowan Williams (past Archbishop of Canterbury) that he would like to write a book about the meaning of God (or words to this effect). Rowan Williams’ response was ‘Good luck with that!’ But I have also heard say that McGilchrist will not be writing any more books after the publication of his next book, The Matter With Things, which has, I believe, gone to press. Whether or not he writes the book about God, it seems to me that this highlights how central is the idea of the ‘Other’ to his writing and thinking. More recently I have heard McGilchrist say that his next book, The Matter With Things, is twice as long as the Master and His Emissary, and that he will not be writing any more long books, but might write short books, and even poetry.

Continue to:

• Chapter 6: The Triumph of the Left Hemisphere

Links

Link to: Image Credits

BACK