Jaynes only talks about (I think, I read the book several years ago) the
origin of consciousness, not the infusion of "soul." His thesis is, of
course, that when consciousness arose, about 1300 BC, it DID cause a
significant change in behaviour. His discussions of these changes
constitutes most of the book.
I'll mention one or two: Compare the ILLIAD to ODYSSEY. On pp 272 ff he
discusses word patterns & literary concepts in these two works which
support his thesis. And , in earlier pages he discusses both physical and
literary features of earlier civilizations that indicate, to him, evdences
of bi-camerality. Speculative & controversial? Of course. It is not his
thesis which I want to defend; it it the data he works with and some of the
concepts it suggests. Among the which is the possibility that bi-cameral
humans still exist among us, "ordinary" people, both good and bad, both
intelligent and retarded, bot educated and ignorant, who are not really
self-aware. A sort of sophist argument, I suppose. I know I have met some
whose conduct suggested such a problem. But, of course, it is all
speculation. No way to test it. Jaynes' book just gives us an opportunity
to think about it. As Gosse's book gives us a chance to think (more deeply)
about what a young earth creation really must include.
I don't know what to make of your quote from Tipler. Highly interesting
data, to be sure. Thanks for pointing it out.
Burgy