In the dim corridors of ancient myths, the labyrinth stands as a symbol of complexity, mystery, and profound enigma. So too does the human brain, a labyrinthine marvel of nature, weave its intricate paths through the very essence of our being. This vast and convoluted network of neural passageways and chambers is the seat of our thoughts, emotions, and consciousness, reflecting both the elegance and perplexity of a well-crafted maze.
The architecture of the brain is a marvel of natural engineering, an intricate web of connections that defies simplicity. Within its confines lie approximately 86 billion neurons, each a tiny, yet vital, component in the grand mosaic of our mind. These neurons reach out with dendritic arms, intertwining and forming synapses, the very junctions where signals leap across microscopic gaps. This network is dense and tangled, mirroring the convolutions of an ancient labyrinth, where each twist and turn leads to new possibilities and unforeseen connections.
To understand the brain is to wander through a maze of wonder, where each discovery leads to new questions, and each answer opens the door to further exploration. Within the brain, we find not only the map of our existence but also the essence of our humanity.
In Iain McGilchrist’s profound work, "The Master and His Emissary: The Divided Brain and the Making of the Western World," he explores how the two hemispheres of the brain shape our perception and understanding of reality. McGilchrist, a psychiatrist and neuroscientist, delves into the distinct ways the left and right hemispheres interact with the world, offering a comprehensive examination of their influence on human experience and cultural development. Through a blend of neuroscience, psychology, philosophy, and history, McGilchrist reveals the complexities of the mind and their far-reaching implications.
His thesis should not be seen as simplistic dichotomies but rather studied with the nuances that the hemispherical theory provides. He breaks the popular myths of ‘analytical left’ versus ‘creative right’ hemispheric differences to provide a much more refined approach in which both the hemispheres are equally responsible for the human functions however the way they deal with each is varied and that minute difference creates a profound impact. Both hemispheres are involved in almost all mental processes, and certainly in all mental states. However, there is a significant distinction in the hemispheres that can only be seen with a shift in our perception.
“The whole problem is that we are obsessed, because of what I argue is our affiliation to left-hemisphere modes of thought, with ‘what’ the brain does - after all, isn’t the brain a machine, and like any machine, the value of it lies in what it does?...The difference, I shall argue, is not in the ‘what’ but in the ‘how’ - by which I don't mean ‘ the means by which’ (machine model again), but ‘the manner in which’, something no one ever asked of a machine.” (McGilchrist, 2009)
He explores the difference not purely in the functions, but in ways of being, something only living things can have. At the core of McGilchrist's thesis is the exploration of the differences between the two hemispheres.
The left hemisphere is characterised by its detail-oriented, and goal-directed approach. It excels in language, abstraction, and systematic thinking, focusing on specific tasks and breaking down information into manageable parts. Left-brained thinking is characterised by its focus on detail, precision, and linear progression. It is adept at following step-by-step procedures, making it indispensable in tasks that require sequential processing.
In contrast, the right hemisphere is known for its holistic, intuitive, and contextual processing. It is the domain of spatial awareness, facial recognition, and the ability to grasp the broader picture. This hemisphere is essential for understanding non-verbal communication, emotional expressions, and the subtleties of human interaction. It is largely context-aware, and open to new experiences. It integrates information, understands the broader context, and is essential for making sense of the world.
The relationship between the hemispheres is dynamic, with the right hemisphere traditionally serving as the “master,” overseeing a broad, integrative perspective, while the left hemisphere functions as the “emissary,” executing specific tasks and providing detailed analysis. This balance ensures a harmonious interaction between detail and context, enabling a rich and nuanced understanding of the world. Each task performed by the human brain needs to firstly understand the larger context within which the task is performed, it can then delve deeper into a detail-oriented approach and eventually understand the output within the larger context. McGilchrist, however, believes that within the last century we have been stopping at the second part of this process.
McGilchrist's investigation extends beyond mere neurological distinctions to explore the historical and cultural ramifications of hemispheric dominance. He argues that Western culture has increasingly favoured the left hemisphere's analytical approach, which has profoundly shaped art, science, politics, and society. This left-hemispheric dominance has led to an emphasis on reductionist thinking, where complex phenomena are broken down into simpler components, often neglecting the deeper meaning that the right hemisphere provides.
This theory is explained by the concept of attention, exploring how the way humans direct their attention significantly shapes their worldview. This is a concept largely spoken about by philosophers throughout time, as human beings we have no direct access to reality, our perception of reality is shaped largely by the culture which is in turn created around what we pay attention to. Mcgilchrist believes that in the last century we have been paying attention solely through the perceptions of our left hemisphere.
This concept of attention through the two hemispheres can be better illustrated by Robert Zaretsky in ‘The Subversive Simone Weil : A life in Five Ideas’ where he is comparing William James’ idea of attention in Principles of Psychology, 1890 to that of Simone Weil’s.
William James explains attention as the “taking possession by the mind, in clear and vivid form, of one out of what seem several simultaneously possible objects or trains of thought. Focalization, concentration, of consciousness is of its essence. It implies withdrawal from some things in order to deal effectively with others.” For Weil, this kind of mental tautness is, in fact, inimical to true attention. (Zaretsky, 2021)
While James’s idea of attention is how we usually understand it, to concentrate, tensing on a specific issue. For the philosopher Simone Weil, ‘the quality of attention dictates every experience you have.’ Her idea of attention was a right-hemisphere driven idea, the purest form of generosity, she tells us, a silent offering to the universe. It is to gaze upon the world with a stillness that echoes the depth of our being. In this quiet observation, we become attuned to the whispers of truth that reside in the ordinary, the mundane, and the overlooked. (Zaretsky, 2021)
Weil's attention is a call to love. It is a reminder that in the act of truly seeing, we come closer to the essence of what it means to be human. It is a dance with the divine, a journey into the heart of reality, where each moment becomes a luminous opportunity to encounter the sacred in all things. Through her poetic vision, we learn that attention is not just a way of seeing but a way of being, a testament to the profound interconnectedness of all life. (Weil, 1963)
This illustrates an example of the two ways our left and right hemispheres look at attention towards the world around us. It is widely accepted that our environments profoundly influence the kind of people we become, intertwining the physical and psychological landscapes. The spaces we inhabit shape our identities, aspirations, and interactions, a concept poignantly explored in the philosophy in Alain de Botton's "The Architecture of Happiness," the soul finds a home in bricks and mortar, where each structure is a reflection of our inner lives and yearnings. Through poetic prose, de Botton explores how buildings shape our moods and ideals, proposing that architecture holds the power to mirror and influence our deepest aspirations.
The essence of de Botton lies in the celebration of the profound connection between our surroundings and our well-being. De Botton invites us to see architecture not merely as a backdrop to our lives but as a vital, living presence that shapes our emotions and thoughts. Through his eloquent and thoughtful exploration, he urges us to recognize and cherish the silent yet powerful dialogue between our inner worlds and the spaces we create and inhabit. (De Botton, 2014)
A similar idea is explored through the notion of spatial culture, as discussed by Sam Griffiths and Alexander von Lünen, which explores the relationship between space and culture, emphasising how spatial arrangements influence and reflect cultural practices, behaviours, and social interactions. This concept examines how physical environments shape human experiences and vice versa, considering the role of urban design, architecture, and geographic spaces in the formation and perpetuation of cultural norms and societal structures. Griffiths and von Lünen's work often integrates interdisciplinary approaches, combining insights from geography, sociology, history, and urban studies to understand the dynamic interplay between space and culture. (Griffiths & Lünen, 2016)
McGilchrist's exploration of the brain's hemispheric functions provides a framework for understanding how these contrasting worldviews have shaped cultures, civilizations, and urban planning.
The history of Delhi's urban design offers a compelling case study of these contrasting worldviews and thus can be explored further to understand how the hemisphere theory can apply to the scale of urban planning and creation of cities and civilization.The remains of at least eight capitals spread across approximately 181.3 square kilometres highlight the importance of this region in India's political geography.
Delhi, known as one of the most dynamic cities in history, has witnessed different settlements of varying size and importance within an area roughly 200 kms from 1500 BC to the British colonial period, with each conqueror leaving behind unique cultural and social legacies.
The last of the two conquests were that of the Mughals and finally the British. The Lodhis moved the capital to Agra in the fifteenth century, but in 1526, Babur established the Mughal dynasty. Shah Jahan later built Shahjahanabad between 1638 and 1658, now known as Old Delhi, which still exists today as the walled city, embodying a rich tapestry of civilizations and traditions.
Old Delhi features an organic street layout with narrow, winding lanes that promote community interaction and walkability. This irregular pattern supports a dense, vibrant urban fabric.
Old Delhi's urban spatial structure was different from that of other Mughal capitals because it was planned and built by one concentrated planning effort. Chandni Chowk, the main commercial thoroughfare, serves as the economic and social heart of the city. Markets are strategically placed at intersections and open spaces, encouraging trade and social interaction.
The principal streets in the Mughal capital were uniquely designed to be wide and straight, a departure from the typically narrow and winding streets found in other Mughal cities. This new town planning concept marked a significant shift for the capital. Chandni Chowk, stretching 1.4 km and bending at the Fatehpuri Begum Mosque, functioned as the city's main axis. Similarly, Faiz Bazaar was broad and straight, connecting the fort's Delhi Gate with the Delhi Gate in the city walls. These primary streets formed the central axes of the city, providing expansive, straight views and serving as crucial hubs for social and economic activities.
Besides these two major roads, other main streets connected the secondary gates of the fort, linking it to the other city gates. These streets branched out into various other lanes and bylanes, all used to access the inner portions of the city.
Residential architecture includes havelis, which are traditional courtyard houses. These havelis provide natural ventilation and light, fostering a connection with nature and facilitating communal living. The inward-facing design ensures privacy and security.
Old Delhi, or Shahjahanabad, was designed with a focus on the whole, where every alleyway and courtyard contributes to the collective experience. Its many branched arteries are narrow with age and congested. No city reflects the endless drama of change better. The labyrinthine layout encourages spontaneous interactions and fosters a sense of belonging. It can be seen as an example of both left and right hemisphere working together, with the larger context and planning as the blueprint to be nuanced at smaller scales to encourage interactions within the city. This was in line with the Eastern philosophies of urban planning that are deeply rooted in cultural, spiritual, and environmental considerations. They emphasise harmony with nature, respect for tradition, and adaptability to local conditions. The Eastern philosophies and traditions tend to embody the idea of flux, change, multiplicity, ambiguity, which can only be comprehended by the right hemisphere.
Conversely, New Delhi, designed by British architect Edwin Lutyens, embodies the Western emphasis on order and efficiency, with wide boulevards, orderly intersections, and segregated zones.
By the mid-18th century, the Mughal Empire had significantly weakened. The last Mughal emperor, Bahadur Shah II (Bahadur Shah Zafar), had limited power and was a symbolic figurehead with the real power lying with regional rulers and the British East India Company. Following the suppression of the rebellion, the British Crown took direct control of India from the East India Company in 1858, establishing the British Raj. Delhi became an important administrative centre under British rule and was later chosen as the new capital of British India in 1911, shifting from Calcutta.
The plan of Lutyens’ Delhi is purely geometrical, the design features broad, tree-lined avenues that radiate from key points at hexagonal nodes such as India Gate and Rashtrapati Bhavan, creating a sense of order and symmetry. The layout integrates large green spaces, roundabouts, and axial vistas, blending European classical styles with Mughal and Indian architectural elements. This design aimed to convey imperial power and grandeur, while also providing a functional and aesthetically pleasing cityscape. The two principal east-west streets connecting the India Gate area are the King’s Way (Rajpath) and the Queen’s Way (Janpath). The city was designed as a symbol of British Imperial power, dominance, and larger-than-life city space. The city’s design reflects the left hemisphere’s preference for fragmentation and compartmentalization, with a clear pattern of social segregation established in the residential bungalows.
While the rigid and planned design of New Delhi provided utilitarian significance, it lost the sense of community within city planning. This reflects McGilchrist's argument that an over-reliance on the left hemisphere's analytical, reductionist approach can lead to a loss of holistic understanding and connection. The compartmentalization and cellularization of life in Western urban design contribute to a fragmented experience of the city, where social interactions are limited to specific contexts and spaces. This contrasts with the more fluid experience of cities designed with holistic principles, where social interactions are integrated into everyday life.
These differences in urban design extend to cultural activities and the relationship between indoor and outdoor spaces. In traditional Eastern societies, activities like bathing, cooking, and childcare were often conducted in communal outdoor spaces, fostering a strong connection with nature and the community. However, the increasing sterility of modern environments, with their emphasis on order, has led to a decline in these communal practices, contributing to a sense of isolation and detachment.
The perception of public spaces as safe or dangerous also reflects cultural attitudes towards community and safety. In closely-knit communities like those in Old Delhi, public spaces are seen as extensions of the home, where children can play safely under the watchful eyes of neighbours. In contrast, the compartmentalised design of modern cities often leads to a sense of isolation, where public spaces are perceived as dangerous, and safety is ensured through separation and surveillance.
The dominance of the left hemisphere has profound implications for various aspects of society. It has contributed to the fragmentation of knowledge, where specialisation and compartmentalization overshadow interdisciplinary understanding. This focus on detail and efficiency has driven technological advancements and economic growth but has also led to environmental degradation, social alienation, and a disconnection from nature. These observations have been made by various philosophers of our time including Byung-Chul Han, who highlights how the current culture reinforces self-focus and isolation, leading to a crisis in connection and love. Han points out the lack of true interaction with 'the Other' in today’s world, resulting in a homogenization of experiences and perspectives. (Han & Butler, 2017)
The current cultural situation, marked by increasing isolation and the decline of communal values, raises larger questions about what it means to be human and how we want to live. The way we design our cities reflects our values and aspirations, shaping our experiences and relationships.
The consequences of this hemispheric imbalance highlights the detrimental effects on the environment, social cohesion, and our connection to the natural world. It has led to environmental degradation, social fragmentation, and a disconnection from nature, as the analytical approach prioritises short-term gains and exploitation over long-term sustainability and harmony.
McGilchrist advocates for a more balanced approach, integrating the strengths of both hemispheres to foster a deeper, more connected understanding of the world. This balance is crucial for addressing the complex challenges of the modern world, from environmental sustainability to social cohesion. By recognizing the value of holistic, right-hemisphere thinking, we can cultivate a more inclusive and compassionate society.
The exploration of Eastern and Western philosophies in urban planning offers a glimpse into the rich tapestry of human culture and the myriad ways in which it shapes our lives. The design of urban spaces reflects and reinforces cultural values, shaping our experiences.. By embracing diverse worldviews we can create cities that resonate with the human spirit, nurturing ambiguous, multiple ways of living and being.
In contemporary architecture and urban design, even though sustainability has emerged as a pivotal trend, it is often quantified through metrics like carbon emissions and energy efficiency. While these analytical approaches are crucial, they sometimes overlook the essence of sustainable living—an understanding that transcends numbers to embrace a deeper connection with the environment.
Buildings are designed to minimise carbon footprints, featuring solar panels, green roofs, and advanced insulation systems. Urban planning emphasises compact, mixed-use developments and public transportation to reduce vehicular emissions.
However, true sustainability extends beyond technical solutions. It involves reimagining our relationship with the environment, where humans are not separate but integral components of the natural world. This perspective encourages designs that foster biodiversity, integrate natural landscapes, and promote local ecosystems.
During this age of AI, where knowledge is being replaced by information, and human beings seem to be living the lives of repetition just as the ‘Myth of Sisyphus’, we are slowly losing touch with the larger philosophical questions of what it means to be a human being. It is imperative that we revisit these questions, considering how the intricate interplay between cognitive processes, cultural perspectives, and urban landscapes shapes our understanding of the world.
A similar idea is proposed by Masanobu Fukuoka in his seminal work ‘One Straw Revolution’ a book that emphasises our detachment as organic beings with the rest of the organic world. He too mirrors that we have for too long relied on the idea of ‘grabbing, taking, separating, manipulating, categorising’ which are all products of the left-hemisphere way of thinking. He urges us to look beyond the compartmentalised and specialised lifestyles and professions and look at ourselves as part of a larger system.
“Before researchers become researchers they should become philosophers. They should consider what the human goal is, what it is that humanity should create.” (Fukuoka, 1975)
To explore the brain is to embark on a journey of self-discovery, much like navigating a labyrinth to find its centre. Each twist and turn, each moment of introspection, brings us closer to understanding the essence of who we are.
Ultimately, this is as much an exercise in understanding the human condition as it is in understanding how that reflects in the physical manifestation of a city. By highlighting the need for a cultural shift towards a more balanced integration of the hemispheres, McGilchrist offers a compelling vision for addressing the challenges faced by modern society and fostering a more harmonious and meaningful existence.