Heribert Watzke

While this may strike some as being a load of Asian nonsense, the second reason I decided to upload this page, and in reply to those that consider the gut-as-a-second-brain theory to be Asian bunk, is that the ancient Greeks appear also to have recognized the importance of the gut and, crucially, Dr Julian Jaynes draws attention to this fact. Jaynes argues that the etor described in the Iliad refers to the belly and that the description of this area of our body and the linking of feelings to our gut was an important step in humankind's development of consciousness, along with the Greek understanding and description of the thumos (referring to 'a mass of internal sensations in response to environmental crises'), the phrenes (the lungs) and the kradie (the heart). Of these, it is the last (the kradie) that we still most often associate with our feelings and our consciousness of feelings (as in 'from the heart' or 'heartbroken').

For people new to my site, the second reason for uploading this page that I have stated above may not make sense to you, in which case please refer to the earlier articles I wrote on Dr Julian Jaynes and Tony Wright. One of the prime reasons for me creating this site is to explore if and how meditative and martial disciplines can enhance our contact with the right brain hemisphere, a contact that Jaynes and Wright would argue has been lost as consciousness continues to develop primarily in our left brain hemisphere.

I will also note now that I do have a couple of problems with what Heribert Watzke is talking about, but please watch the video first and / or read the summary.

Heribert Watzke - The Brain in Your Gut

Notes from the Heribert Watzke presentation

* Heribert Watzke argues that cooking food is a fundamental technology that we tend to overlook because it is so much a part of our everyday life.

* Our teeth are not designed to tear raw meat from bones. Heribert Watzke argues that our teeth are arranged in the way they are because we are disposed to eating cooked food (see my critique below).

* Heribert Watzke argues that the transformation (through the application of heat) of raw food to cooked food has made us what we are today.

* Therefore, rather than classify ourselves as omnivores, we should consider ourselves to be coctivores (eaters of cooked food).

* Heribert Watzke argues that our consumption of cooked food is what produced a big brain in humankind and this in turn allowed for the development of advanced cultures and technologies (see my critique below).

* Our brain uses about 25% of the energy our bodies produce, and this energy comes from food.

* The ability to cook food allowed us to migrate as it gave us a greater range of food stuffs to choose from and digest successfully.

* Through eating cooked food, Heribert Watzke argues that our brains grew in size but our stomachs shrunk.

* Eating food gives us the reward of pleasure, thereby encouraging us to continue eating (and sustaining our life) in pursuit of more pleasure. Scientifically this is caused by the naturally-produced drug dopamine, which is our naturally arising reward for engaging in activities that sustain our life (such as eating) or that sustain our species (such as sex).

* Our gut operates as a second brain. It is linked to our emotional lymphic system, hence the term 'gut feeling'. Out gut 'brain' and our physiological brain communicate with one another to reach decisions. We can classify the gut as a second brain due to the large number of nerves (500 million nerve cells and 100 million neurons comprising 20 different types; about the size of a cat brain. Further, this 'second brain' is autonomous of our primary brain and is able to make decisions independently) caught between and penetrating into the muscle walls of our gut.

* Both the Big Brain and the Gut Brain have their own priorities. The Gut Brain is concerned with defense and digestion, while the Big Brain seeks integration and behavioral control. The Gut Brain communicates with the Big Brain and sends relevant signals (such as a hunger signal), yet the Big Brain has the option of ignoring those signals.

* The Big Brain can override hunger signals from the Gut Brain. Doing so over an extended period of time leads to an anorexic condition (which can be potentially life-threatening).

* On the other hand, signals from our Gut Brain indicating that our hunger is satisfied can also be overridden by the Big Brain, leading to over-eating.

* A future aim for Heribert Watzke is to create balance between the messages from the Big Brain and the Gut Brain. To do this, it is theorized that changes in our methods of cooking will allow a stronger signal to be generated by the Gut Brain that cannot be so easily overridden by the Big Brain. Therefore, when we feel hunger we would satisfy that hunger; when we felt full, we would stop eating.

Critique of Heribert Watzke

The first point that I want to draw your attention to is Heribert Watzke's assertion that our brains have grown as a result of eating cooked food. This is not the case. In fact, having reached a peak in size some 40,000 years ago, our brains have shrunk over the millenia. What I would argue (inspired by the work of Dr Julian Jaynes and Tony Wright) is that while our brains have continued to shrink, our consciousness in the same period has changed. More specifically we have witnessed a shift in primary brain dominance from the right brain hemisphere to the left brain hemisphere. Tony Wright argues that this shift began some 200,000 years ago when we stopped eating a primarily fruit-based diet. Without various chemicals that suppressed our hormones, we began to experience a shift in consciousness. Cooking food is something that would have further exacerbated this process by further removing what little hormonal suppressants remained in our non-frugivore (non-fruit) diet. This is important to consider because it is our left brain hemisphere that is conceptual in function. It is the fact that most of us are left brain hemisphere dominant that has allowed for innumerable technological breakthroughs over the centuries, which have brought us to our current state of living (though at the detriment of sensations from our right brain hemisphere, which are non-conceptual; hence my argument that meditative and martial disciplines are focused on restoring right hemisphere contact (mushin) leading finally to satori or 'enlightenment', which I define as a brief moment of complete right brain hemisphere dominance).

While Dr Jaynese begins his investigation of human consciousness with the ancient Greeks and the Iliad, Tony Wright goes back much further, approximately 200,000 years ago, to when we as a species left tropical rain forests and experienced a major change in our diet (Heribert Watzke notes that cooking food allowed us to migrate more easily). This, Wright argues, is when the initial shift in hemispherical dominance began; what Jaynes is describing is the tail end of a very long process (which was no doubt accelerating owing to things like the creation of reading and writing, which is one of the most conceptual (left hemisphere) activities we can engage in). We should also be aware that both authors maintain that this process is dynamic and continues today. Your reading of this article (and me typing it) reinforce our left brain hemisphere dominance. We would need to engage in some kind of meditation to counter this effect.

The second point of contention I have relates to whether or not we as humans are naturally predisposed to eat cooked food. More fundamentally, and more closely related to the work of Tony Wright, is the question of whether we as humans are natural carnivores (meat eaters) or herbivores (plant eaters).

This argument also plays a central role in the work of Tony Wright, who posits that some 200,000 years ago we were living in tropical rain forests eating a diet that consisted almost entirely of fruit, plants and nuts. I have provided a video (see below) which suggests we do not have the physiology to make us natural meat eaters and that the very need we have to cook meat rather than eat it raw proves that we are not naturally carnivorous.

My personal feeling, again heavily influenced by the work of Tony Wright, is that we are more accurately natural frugivores (fruit eaters) rather than herbivores. While we do possess some sharp teeth (which would suggest a carnivorous bent) we have minimal canine teeth. I believe our sharp frontal teeth are there to provide us with the means to break through the hardened skins of certain fruits to get to the goodness within. This is obviously a highly debatable point, so please enjoy the video and make up your own mind.

Notes

* Meat eaters have a lot of canines and their jaws are long and pointed (to allow them to reach into their prey and rip out the meat).

* Herbivores have more flat teeth and rounded jaws to enable the grinding of vegetation.

* Carnivores, for obvious reasons, have many advanced hunting skills such as night vision and incredible speed and agility.

* Meat eaters have short intestines, allowing for meat to be digested quickly before a surplus of fat is also digested.

* Meat eaters have enzymes in their body that kill the bacteria found in rotting meat.

* Meat eaters are attracted by the smell of rotting meat (their food source is already dead, curtailing the need to hunt).

Related Articles

Take a look at the following articles to better understand how the ideas presented by Heribert Watzke fit in with the content of this site.

My Stroke of Insight: A Synopsis

Mushin: A New Definition and a New Understanding