Español Português
"Understanding the Brain", The Birth of a Learning Science, 2007, page 116
“Is There One ‘Left-Brain’ & Another ‘Right-Brain’?” (4)
Since the 70s, Arise More Neuromyths About the "Split Brain"
Since the 70s, Arise More Neuromyths About the "Split Brain"
This set of findings ([1], [2]) was ripe for spawning neuromyths. In 1970, Robert Ornstein’s "The Psychology of Consciousness" hypothesised that “Westerners” use mainly the left half of their brain with a well-trained left hemisphere thanks to their focus on language and logical thinking.
However, they neglect their right hemisphere and, therefore, their emotional and intuitive thinking. Ornstein associates the left hemisphere with the logical and analytical thinking of “Westerners” and the right hemisphere with emotional and intuitive “Oriental” thinking.
The traditional dualism between intelligence and intuition is thus accorded a “Physiological Origin”, based on the difference between the two hemispheres of the brain. Apart from the highly questionable ethical aspect of Ornstein’s ideas, they are the accumulated result of misinterpretations and distortions of available scientific findings.
Another widespread notion, without scientific foundation, stipulates that the left hemisphere tends to process quick changes and analyses the details and characteristics of the stimuli, while the right processes the simultaneous and general characteristics of the stimuli.This model remains entirely speculative. Starting from the differences between the verbal hemisphere (the left) and the non-verbal hemisphere (the right), a growing number of abstract concepts and relationships between mental functions and the two hemispheres has made their appearance on the neuromyth stage, moving further and further away from the scientific findings.
Gradually, further myths emerged in which the two hemispheres are associated not just with two ways of thinking but as revelations of two types of personality. The concepts of “left brain thinking” and “right brain thinking”, together with the idea of a dominant hemisphere, led to the notion that each individual depends predominantly on one of the two hemispheres, with distinctive cognitive styles. A rational and analytical person could be characterised as “left-brained”, an intuitive and emotional person as “right-brained”
The idea that “Western Societies” focus on only half of our mental capacities (“our left brain thinking”) and neglect the other half (“our right brain thinking”) became widespread, and some educationists and systems jumped on the bandwagon to recommend that schools change their teaching methods according to the dominant hemisphere concept.
Educators like M. Hunter and E.P Torrance claimed that educational programmes were principally made for “left brains” and favour left brain-dependent activities like always sitting in class or learning algebra, instead of favouring the right hemisphere by allowing students to stretch out and learn geometry.
Hence, methods were devised which sought to engage the two hemispheres, or even to emphasise activities related to the right hemisphere. Such an example is “show and tell”: instead of just reading texts to the students (left hemisphere action), the teacher also shows images and graphs (right hemisphere actions). 
Other methods use music, metaphors, role-playing, meditation, or drawing, all to activate the synchronisation of the two hemispheres. Arguably, they have served to advance education by diversifying its methods. Nevertheless, insofar as they have borrowed on theories of the brain, they are based on scientific misinterpretation as the two halves of the brain cannot be so clearly separated.
However, they neglect their right hemisphere and, therefore, their emotional and intuitive thinking. Ornstein associates the left hemisphere with the logical and analytical thinking of “Westerners” and the right hemisphere with emotional and intuitive “Oriental” thinking.
The traditional dualism between intelligence and intuition is thus accorded a “Physiological Origin”, based on the difference between the two hemispheres of the brain. Apart from the highly questionable ethical aspect of Ornstein’s ideas, they are the accumulated result of misinterpretations and distortions of available scientific findings.
Another widespread notion, without scientific foundation, stipulates that the left hemisphere tends to process quick changes and analyses the details and characteristics of the stimuli, while the right processes the simultaneous and general characteristics of the stimuli.This model remains entirely speculative. Starting from the differences between the verbal hemisphere (the left) and the non-verbal hemisphere (the right), a growing number of abstract concepts and relationships between mental functions and the two hemispheres has made their appearance on the neuromyth stage, moving further and further away from the scientific findings.
Gradually, further myths emerged in which the two hemispheres are associated not just with two ways of thinking but as revelations of two types of personality. The concepts of “left brain thinking” and “right brain thinking”, together with the idea of a dominant hemisphere, led to the notion that each individual depends predominantly on one of the two hemispheres, with distinctive cognitive styles. A rational and analytical person could be characterised as “left-brained”, an intuitive and emotional person as “right-brained”
The idea that “Western Societies” focus on only half of our mental capacities (“our left brain thinking”) and neglect the other half (“our right brain thinking”) became widespread, and some educationists and systems jumped on the bandwagon to recommend that schools change their teaching methods according to the dominant hemisphere concept.
Educators like M. Hunter and E.P Torrance claimed that educational programmes were principally made for “left brains” and favour left brain-dependent activities like always sitting in class or learning algebra, instead of favouring the right hemisphere by allowing students to stretch out and learn geometry.
Hence, methods were devised which sought to engage the two hemispheres, or even to emphasise activities related to the right hemisphere. Such an example is “show and tell”: instead of just reading texts to the students (left hemisphere action), the teacher also shows images and graphs (right hemisphere actions). 
Other methods use music, metaphors, role-playing, meditation, or drawing, all to activate the synchronisation of the two hemispheres. Arguably, they have served to advance education by diversifying its methods. Nevertheless, insofar as they have borrowed on theories of the brain, they are based on scientific misinterpretation as the two halves of the brain cannot be so clearly separated. 
"Understanding the Brain", The Birth of a Learning Science, 2007, page 116
(To be continued...)
