Left in the Dark: (The Biological Origins of the Fall from Grace) : an Investigation into the Evolution of the Human Brain. a Journey to the Edge of the Human Mind [ペーパーバック]

The main premise of this book is that the left side of the brain creates a false version of life, overriding the reality perceived by the right side.

In Chapters 1 and 4 the authors refer to modern research showing that, when unfettered by the left brain, the right brain is far more capable than generally accepted. For instance, it is responsible for multi-level functions, originality, imagination, deep thinking, self reflection, musicality, enhanced visual acuity, and even the ability to heal more quickly.

It turns out the right hemisphere actually possesses far more complex abilities than the left but these are normally held in check by the left's inhibitory control, which increases with time. To illustrate, child musical prodigies and mathematical geniuses can lose a measure of their fabulous abilities as they get older and their left hemisphere control becomes stronger. Because of this increasing left brain dominance over time, we also get more fearful as we age, even though for the most part it is kept below the surface.

In chapter 4 the authors explain the left brain is actually dysfunctional and, because of it, we may even struggle with two realities. One is a right hemisphere reality based on true perception and experience and the other a left hemisphere version based on verbal stories it has made up to cover up conflict and in which it believes totally. Shockingly, research on damaged brains reveal we routinely make our decisions subconsciously but our left brain (conscious) rationalizations of these choices are pure fiction.

So, the left brain doesn't really experience reality at all and will always lie to maintain its subjective version. It appears disconnected from a truer perspective provided by right hemisphere function, meaning our whole lives may be based on denials, suppressions, and lies - we are all insane, in other words. As the authors point out: is it any wonder that our interpersonal relationships (individually, as groups and even nations) are fraught with difficulties?

The authors claim that the right brain enables peak performance whilst the destructive behavior of humanity is due to left-brain dominance, completely ignoring the large part played by our reptilian brain (the oldest and smallest region of the brain) which is blindly instinctive and responsible for ritualistic behavior, survival fears, domination/attack/fighting, preening and mating.

In chapter 6, the final one, there is a muddled exploration of processes that can reduce the restrictions of the left hemisphere. The authors in passing mention techniques for actively engaging the right hemisphere: visualization, mantra, meditation, dream techniques, use of consciousness-changing chemicals, refining nutritional intake and opening to the 'subtle energy' of spiritual locations such as cathedrals, stone circles or waterfalls. They claim that when humans started eating grains the production of melatonin and the size of the pineal gland were both reduced and refer to womb research showing that less melatonin is associated with more testosterone which creates greater masculization of the brain (in both sexes), in turn resulting in reduced social skills in life.

They believe that our long-ago ancestors suffered changes in brain chemistry that made the left side of the brain dominant over the right. While this might be correct, the greatest pity of this book is that the authors did not stick to left-right brain differences, which by itself would have made a wonderful book. Instead in chapters 2 and 3 they indulged in wild theories, presented as fact, pushing the benefits of a raw-plant-diet via completely unsubstantiated versions of anthropology and prehistory. They allege, for instance, that human teeth are mainly adapted to eat fruit and plant matter when in fact our teeth show we are omnivores, capable of eating either meat or plant foods.

There is no basis in anatomy or physiology for their assumption that humans are pre-adapted to the raw-vegetables-only diet. In fact, although vegetarians will hate this, there is actually much more basis for eating a high proportion of saturated fats (yup, saturated) and organic meat, as explained in books like "Trick and Treat" and books on the discoveries of Dr Weston Price.

In chapter 5 the authors return to making wild claims, this time about fertility, which in humans has about a 5% success ratio to sex whilst in animals it's nearer 95%. A raw-food-diet apparently reduces libido in men, which appears to be seen as a benefit as "we are addicted to sex" (I'm betting most of us wish we were!). They consider chemicals like steroids, melatonin, serotonin, DMT, MDMA (ecstasy). They refer to the "second brain" in the gut, which contains a highly complex neural system and displays a great degree of autonomy. In a rather convoluted way, they try to link all this to what they allege was the original fruit-and-leaves diet of our forest ancestors.

They refer to one study showing that, in those eating a mainly raw fruit diet, not sleeping for several days does not lead to the usual mind chaos but instead - due to reduced left brain domination - creates transcendental experiences and genius-type abilities, albeit for very short periods. Apparently on the basis of this one study, the authors assert that those who eat mainly raw fruit can better use their right-brain abilities. On the basis of nothing at all they allege that when (and because) humans originally ate only raw fruit and leaves they developed bigger brains. This is a pity because they also claim we are suffering from degenerative affliction - and in fact over the last century humanity's health has been degenerating measurably with each generation - but the valid claims in this book are tainted by far too many wild claims with hardly a shred of evidence behind them.

I was tempted to deduct 2 stars for chapters 2 and 3 and some parts of chapters 5 and 6 but on reflection felt 4 stars was deserved because of the original thinking evident in chapters 1, 4 and 5, offering their fascinating genius-right-brain hypotheses.

It's also worth knowing that, in "Walking Your Blues Away: How to Heal the Mind and Create Emotional Well-Being" by Thom Hartmann, he refers to research showing that learning to read and write (especially before age 7) actually creates left-brain dominance which means more disconnection from the emotional and empathic right-brain side. This means that we become more willing (or even driven) to use violence, particularly men against women.

Because literacy changes how our brains are forming as we grow and develop, we have no reference point for understanding how we may have been had we not grown up literate, and thus no ability to truly understand or empathize with nonliterate and nonviolent societies. The result is that we assume that nonviolent societies can't really exist, and that our type of brain development is "normal" for the human race.

Left in the dark is not a book. It is an adventure into the depths of the mind, body and soul from a different yet somehow intrinsically familiar perspective showing us how things became what they are today. Different because the book takes the reader on an exciting journey that is off track when it comes to the usual landscape of today's scientific theories, and is right on track when it comes to the science of tomorrow. Familiar because for me personally it weaves togehter almost everything that I've been interested in: evolutionary biology, spirituality, the brain chemistry, the feeling of Flow, raw and living food and the strong feeling I've always had that this is not how life was meant to be lived (ie the modern civilization).

Reading this book was a long "aha!" and the feeling of putting all the strange pieces of the puzzle together into a beutiful Vision of Man and Nature.

I talk about this book with most of my friends and recommend it to everyone. I hope for many coming editions updated of this Master-Piece (of the large puzzle of Existence)

Keep it up!

Pierre Durrani
Järna, Sweden

The authors present a complex model based on the hormonal and metabolic effect of frugivorous diet. It describes a similarity and interaction between the antisteriodal effect of fruit diet (weak) and the pineal gland (much stronger). According to the authors, the consecutive hominid lines are offshoots of a proto-hominid line where an enhanced pineal activity kicked in (the critical junction), and was maintained by the fruit diet until they stayed inside the rainforest. Changing to meat, later grain, and cooked food - with its steroidal effect - started a slow reverse process on the brain. The so-called "acceleration" (early onset of puberty in industrialized countries) is not the result of the better diet, and it is not in the good direction as thought. On the contrary. The book presents another total flip-over (the kind I like): hemispheric lateralization comes from degeneration (see below).

I cannot argue for or against the anthropological part, but the physiology of bipedalism in a flooded forest floor, and the neuropsychological components of the book made sense to me.

Pros:
--The idea of non-DNA, but transcription dependent inheritance is sound. It means, the library is unchanged but the what, and the when of the reading changes, while passed down matrimonially from the mother to the female fetus. Sounds as a powerful explanation why the chimp and human genome has more overlap than the chimp and other primates despite the obvious phenotypical differences.

--Turning hemispheric specialization upside down is heuristic, and my favorite part. It is not an evolutionary step; it is the result of steroid induced neurodegeneration. Explains well some peculiar features of lateralization. The same thoughts are drifting the book toward spiritual waters. The idea of being under the dominance and tyranny of the degenerating side of our brain may sound decadent to some readers. Nevertheless, just look around. Don't be misled by the hightech glitters. Technology is evolutionary, and adaptive only if keeps balance with the environment.

--It sends a powerful message: for better health eat what you may find in a rainforest (or related plants). Not even grains, corn, or potato.

Cons:
--The book carries some features of conspiracy theories: i.e marshalling more evidence pro than con, and stitching them together without balancing the weight of the evidence.

--The explanation of lack of evidence is not evidence (rare fossilization in the humid rainforest), yet has some point on the bias of current theories.

--The authors try to grab too much, which is impossible without letting a good deal to slip through their fingers. E.g. the passages on baldness are funny, and a gynecologist would probably jump out of his skin at the chapter on reproduction (which also has some good points).