The left hemisphere is on a quest for meaning, even when there isn’t any. False memories, pareidolia—the stress-induced perception of pattern in noise[59]—these are Lefty’s doing. When there are no data, or no meaning, Lefty may find it anyway. Lefty gets religion.
But sometimes patterns are subtle. Sometimes, noise is almost all there is: a kind of noise anyway, at least to classically evolved senses. Smeared probabilities, waves that obscure the location or momentum of whatever you’re squinting at. Virtual particles that elude detection anywhere past the edges of black holes. Maybe, when you move a few orders of magnitude away from the world our senses evolved to parse, a touch of pareidolia can take up the slack. Like the feather that evolved for thermoregulation and then got press-ganged, fully formed, into flight duty, perhaps the brain’s bogus-purpose-seeking wetware might be repurposed to finding patterns it once had to invent. Maybe the future is a fusion of the religious and the empirical.
Maybe all Lefty needs is a little help.
Malfunctions and breakdowns showed them the way. Certain kinds of brain damage result in massive increases in certain types of creativity.16 Strokes provoke bursts of artistic creativity,[60] frontotemporal dementia supercharges some parts of the brain even as it compromises others.[61] Some autistics possess visual hyperacuity comparable to that of birds of prey, even though they’re stuck with the same human eyes as the rest of us.[62] Schizophrenics are immune to certain optical illusions.[63] At least some kinds of synesthesia confer cognitive advantages[64] (people who literally see time, arrayed about them in multicolored splendor, are twice as good as the rest of us at recalling events from their own personal timelines[65]). And—as Daniel Brüks reflects—brain damage is actually a prerequisite for basic rationality in certain types of decision-making.[66]
The Bicamerals set out to damage their brains, in very specific ways. They manipulated the expression of NR2B,[67] tweaked TRNP-1[68] production, used careful cancers to promote growth (their genes tagged for easy identification,[69] should anything go wrong) and increase neurosculptural degrees of freedom. Then they ruthlessly weeded those connections, pruned back the tangle into optimum, isolated islands of functionality.[70] They improved their pattern-matching skills to a degree almost inconceivable to mere baselines.
Such enhancements come at a cost.[71], [72] Bicamerals have lost the ability to communicate effectively across the cognitive-species divide. It’s not just that they’ve rewired their speech centers[73] and are now using different parts of the brain to talk; they think now almost entirely in metaphor, in patterns that contain meaning even if they don’t, strictly speaking, exist.
Things get even messier when linked into networks, which can literally scatter one’s mind even at today’s rudimentary levels of connectivity. The “transactive memory system” called Google is already rewiring the parts of our brains that used to remember facts locally; now those circuits store search protocols for remote access of a distributed database.[74] And Google doesn’t come anywhere close to the connectivity of a real hive mind.
Which is not to say that hive minds aren’t already a ubiquitous part of Human society. You are a hive mind, always have been: a single coherent consciousness spread across two cerebral hemispheres, each of which—when isolated—can run its own stand-alone, conscious entity with its own thoughts, aesthetics, even religious beliefs.[75] The reverse also happens. A hemisphere forced to run solo when its partner is anaesthetised (preparatory to surgery, for instance) will manifest a different personality than the brain as a whole—but when those two hemispheres reconnect, that solo identity gets swallowed up by whatever dual-core persona runs on the whole organ.[16] Consciousness expands to fill the space available.
The Bicameral hive takes its lead from Krista and Tatiana Hogan, conjoined craniopagus twins whose brains are fused at the thalamus.[76] Among other things, the thalamus acts as a sensory relay; the twins share a common set of sensory inputs. Each sees through the other’s eyes. Tickle one, the other laughs. Anecdotal evidence suggests that they can share thoughts, and although they have distinct personalities each uses the word “I” when talking about the other twin.
All this resulting from fusion at a sensory relay. Suppose they were linked farther up? A thought doesn’t know to stop and turn back when it reaches the corpus callosum. Why would it behave any differently if it encountered a callosum of a different sort; why should two minds linked by a sufficiently fat pipe be any more distinct than the halves of your own brain?
Sufficiently high bandwidth, therefore, would likely result in a single integrated consciousness across any number of platforms. Technologically, the links themselves might exploit so-called “ephatic coupling”[77] (in which direct synaptic stimulation is bypassed and neurons are induced to fire by diffuse electrical fields generated elsewhere in the brain). Synchrony is vitaclass="underline" unified conscious only exists when all parts fire together with a signal latency of a few hundred milliseconds, tops.[23], [24] Throttle that pipe and it should be possible to retain individuality while accessing memories and sensory data from your fellow nodes.[78]
I’ve kept the extent of Bicameral hive integration flexible, allowing internode connections to throttle up and down as the need arises—but whether those bandwidth-versus-dialup decisions are made by the nodes themselves or by something more inclusive remains ambiguous. If you want some hint of the ramifications of total cognitive integration, I point you to the (apparently) catatonic Moksha Mind of the Eastern Dharmic Alliance.[79]
However the hive links up—whatever its degree of conscious coherence—it is a religious experience. Literally.
We know what rapture is: a glorious malfunction, a glitch in the part of the brain that keeps track of where the body ends and everything else begins.[80] When that boundary dissolves the mind feels connected to everything, feels literally at one with the universe. It’s an illusion, of course. Transcendence is experience, not insight. That’s not why Bicamerals feel the rapture.
They feel it because it’s an unavoidable side effect of belonging to a hive. Sharing sensory systems, linking minds one to another—such connections really do dissolve the boundaries between bodies. Bicameral spiritual rapture isn’t so much an illusion as a bandwidth meter. It still feels good, of course, which has its own implications. Bicams rap out when they hook up to solve problems. They actually get off on discovery; if baselines got those kind of rewards they wouldn’t need tenure.
59
Jennifer A. Whitson and Adam D. Galinsky, “Lacking Control Increases Illusory Pattern Perception,”
60
Helen Thomson, “Mindscapes: Stroke Turned Ex-Con into Rhyming Painter”
61
Sandra Blakeslee, “A Disease That Allowed Torrents of Creativity,”
62
Emma Ashwin et al., “Eagle-Eyed Visual Acuity: An Experimental Investigation of Enhanced Perception in Autism,”
63
Danai Dima et al., “Understanding Why Patients with Schizophrenia Do Not Perceive the Hollow-Mask Illusion Using Dynamic Causal Modelling,”
64
Heather Mann et al., “Time-Space Synaesthesia–A Cognitive Advantage?,”
65
Victoria Gill, “Can You See Time?,”
66
Michael Koenigs et al., “Damage to the Prefrontal Cortex Increases Utilitarian Moral Judgements,”
67
Deheng Wang et al., “Genetic Enhancement of Memory and Long-Term Potentiation but Not CA1 Long-Term Depression in NR2B Transgenic Rats,”
68
Ronny Stahl et al., “Trnp1 Regulates Expansion and Folding of the Mammalian Cerebral Cortex by Control of Radial Glial Fate,”
69
Robert M. Hoffman, “The Multiple Uses of Fluorescent Proteins to Visualize Cancer in Vivo,”
70
Anonymous, “Autism: Making the Connection,”
71
Fabienne Samson et al., “Enhanced Visual Functioning in Autism: An ALE Meta-Analysis,”
72
Deborah Halber, “Gene Research May Help Explain Autistic Savants,”
73
Fumiko Hoeft et al., “Functional and Morphometric Brain Dissociation Between Dyslexia and Reading Ability,”
74
B. Sparrow, J. Liu, and D. M. Wegner, “Google Effects on Memory: Cognitive Consequences of Having Information at Our Fingertips,”
75
V. S. Ramachandran and Stuart Hameroff, “Beyond Belief: Science, Reason, Religion & Survival. Salk Institute for Biological Studies, Nov 5–7, 2006 (Session 4),”
76
Jordan Squair, “Craniopagus: Overview and the Implications of Sharing a Brain,”
77
Costas A. Anastassiou et al., “Ephaptic Coupling of Cortical Neurons,”
78
Kaj Sotala and Harri Valpola, “Coalescing Minds: Brain Uploading-Related Group Mind Scenarios,”
79
The Pontifical Academy of Sciences, “An Enemy Within: The Bicameral Threat to Institutional Religion in the Twenty-First Century (An Internal Report to the Holy See),” (Internal Report, 2093).
80
A. B. Newberg and E. G. d’ Aquili, “The Neuropsychology of Religious and Spiritual Experience,”