Two Minds, Two Brains

Because Goleman’s “theory” of mind is predicated strictly on his interpretations of knowledge from brain analysis, he involves some questionable conclusions concerning the mind. as an example, he states, “sensory signals from eye or ear travel 1st within the brain to the neural structure then — across one conjugation — to the amygdala; a second signal from the neural structure is routed to the cortex — the thinking brain. This branching permits the corpus amygdaloideum to start to reply before the cortex, that mulls data through many levels of brain circuits before it totally perceives and eventually initiates its a lot of finely tailored response.”

Based on this description of brain activity (and different similar descriptions), he concludes " . . . we've 2 minds, one that thinks and one that feels . . . These 2 basically other ways of knowing move to construct our mental life (p. 8).”  Or again: “In a way we've 2 brains, 2 minds — and 2 totally different forms of intelligence: rational and emotional .” we wish to “find the intelligent balance between the 2, to harmonize head and heart .”

Suppose we tend to grant that "signals" to the brain proceed to the corpus amygdaloideum before they reach the neo-cortex, which this truth permits the corpus amygdaloideum to start to reply before the neo-cortex, it yet doesn't follow that we must always then interpret the brain to possess "two minds — and 2 totally different forms of intelligence; rational and emotional ."

For either we tend to grant that the corpus amygdaloideum has some psychological feature capability, or that it's none. If we tend to believe it to possess some, we must always not conclude that the neo-cortex is that the exclusive seat of "cognition" and "rationality." If we tend to believe that the corpus amygdaloideum lacks all psychological feature capability, there would be no reason to believe the corpus amygdaloideum capable of generating specific emotions — all of that presuppose specific psychological feature definition.