Iain McGilchrist wrote an excellent book. It is called “The master and his emissary”, talks about the divided brain and the making of the western world, and everybody needs to read it.
He also wrote “The matter with things”, which is an attack and an insult. It is too good and too beautiful and too hard to read. “The master and his emissary”, not exactly a simple read either, has a redeeming part two. Titled “How the brain has shaped our world” this second half of the book contains a tour through western history that is much more insightful and inspired than a book about the brain is supposed to have. It is a true revelation.
In a nutshell Iain McGilchrist talks about how different periods in western history where dominated by different ways of thinking. He suggests that the balance of the brain hemispheres changed back and forth over time. Colorful progressive periods like ancient Greek, renaissance and the first enlightenment are identified with right hemisphere dominance. Darker periods like the final Roman centuries and the reformation are shown to be left hemisphere centered. McGilchrist’s argument is, of course, much more subtle and nuanced. The book is required reading.
The open question in McGilchrist’s history is how hemisphere rebalancing comes about. There is a suggestion that the left hemisphere has a tendency to take over, to attempt an “upgrade” from its proper emissary role to become a master on its own. The central thesis of the book is that the left hemisphere does not know its limits and, left to its own devices, will assume to be fully capable to deal with the world. With devastating consequences. What is less obvious is how things can tilt towards the right hemisphere, even if this is clearly desirable.
Ismael Perez of “Our Cosmic Origin” fame maintains that the Knights Templars created the renaissance. The story is too colorful to pass by: Digging at Solomon’s temple in Jerusalem, the Templars are said to have found occult secrets. When the order was disbanded in 1312, the occult knowledge went underground and has been the fertile soil for European secret societies ever since. The question remains: How did the renaissance come about?
In “Rosicrucian and Masonic Origins” Manly P. Hall traces the origin of Freemasonry to the craftsmen that built King Solomon’s temple, but admits that the original meaning to most of its symbols is lost. Remarkable, we learn that Vitruvius in his “Ten Books on Architecture” “revealed that which was permissible”. That is, there are inner secrets, probably relating to architecture, too precious to be revealed. There is also the curious fact that the builders’ tools are being used as symbols. Manly writes: “The tools of the builders’ craft were first employed by the Dionysian as symbols under which to conceal the mysteries of the soul and the secrets of human regeneration.”
How did the Templars initiate the renaissance? We know that Gothic cathedrals started to appear all over Europe when the Templars were at their prime. The magnificence and breathtaking beauty of a Gothic cathedral is obvious. We understand the masons that build those cathedrals had remarkable knowledge. Yet, Manly P. Hall dismisses the idea that Freemasonry might, in fact, own its forgotten secrets to those cathedral building free masons. Could it be true that the secrets of the cathedrals goes beyond beauty? Fulcanelli finds much to talk about in “The Mystery of the Cathedrals”. Could it be that the “secrets of human regeneration” are a physical aspect of a properly functioning cathedral? Could it be that the lights and sounds and vibes inside a cathedral are conductive to human health and brain development?
It would be one explanation why the reformation, after it stripped cathedrals and churches of its splendor and beauty, regressed to a much more limited way of thinking.