> To-may-toe, To-mah-toe I think that dismissal of a key aspect in the comparison is really stretching it. Steiner was spiritual; Jaynes was "disproving" the s

> To-may-toe, To-mah-toe I think that dismissal of a key aspect in the comparison is really stretching it. Steiner was spiritual; Jaynes was "disproving" the spiritual, in a sense. > That Jaynes attributes it to a lesser-integration of the hemispheres, while Steiner attributes it to different stages of development in the physical/etheric/astral bodies, is a minor detail This difference alone is huge. You cannot say they are related because of the flimsiest of coincidences that both discuss the ego and religion. Nothing else matches. I'd say your question, "was Jaynes a closet anthroposophist?" can be answered with a "no".