Rating: 
Summary: Expanding the definition of the mind.
Review: In this book, Damasio, a neurologist by training, reformulates that which we call the mind. He expresses the conviction that in modern-day neuroscience, the mind is often seen as a direct product of the brain. Whereas Damasio agrees that the mind is in large part produced by the brain, he also asserts that body states are a crucial propronent of the mind. This determination leads to the premise for this book: that reason does not rest on intellect alone but on emotions as well. We have often made "gut feeling" decisions that Damasio would consider a huge proponent of reasoning. He, like other great neuroscientists, is drawing neuroscience away from localization and more towards associations. He uses excellent example of Phineas Gage and other clinical viginettes to accentuate his point.
It is refreshing to see clinicians intersted in the basic sciences. Even more encouraging is the recent trend of scientists, such as Damasio and LeDoux, who are in essence re-envisioning the self and drawing a theory of mind from this abstraction. I believe this is the direction that theory of mind and consciousness will head, espcially with such intimate technological advances. With all the spectacular advances in neuroscience, people in the field often need to be reminded that the brain exists in the context of a living body.
The downfall of this book is that I do not think it necessarily brings anything new to the table. It highlights theories that many great thinkers already hold. In addition to its lack of novelty it also is not a wonderfully written book. At times, the writing is awkward and I feel that the organization could also be improved upon. As is often the case in neuroscience literature, the ending makes a leap of faith from basic science facts and theories to very generalized abstract concepts.
In summary, this is a good book for those interested in the theory of mind and basic neurosciences, neurology, or psychiatry. It is also a quick read.
Rating: 
Summary: Some hints for enjoying this book more
Review: Other reviewers have surely summarized and analyzed this fine book far better than I could, so here are some hints that may help you productively enjoy it:
1.) scan sections of the book before and after you read them. The author's simple expositions are terrific but the organization and data blending can be confusing, and the pace of such a book often slows uncomfortably. 2.) If you are new to this subject (and any non-professional who hasn't had a CNS course recently is probably a beginner) I'd supplement this book with a good but lighter introduction to brain research (I'd strongly recommend the NYT Book of the Brain). 3.) I'd advise using a good neuroanatomy text or atlas like Barr or Hanaway. The author's maps are surprisingly skimpy and I strongly hope he includes a few pages of neuroanatomical diagrams in any future editions. 4.) You may want to underline terms and definitions, and note the reference at the back of the book -- the book has no glossary and the index is annoyingly weak. 5.) I thought the most valuable sections were on the Somatic Marker Hypothesis, the Body-Minded Brain, and the Postscriptum -- consider scanning these sections first.
Good luck and enjoy. The author's credentials are superb, his perspective complements other authors such as Edelmann and LeDoux, and he brings the unique and empathetic perspective of a neurologist who has specialied in analyzing the changes associated wtih discrete neuropathological conditions. The ideas you may receive from this wonderful book should be well worth the effort, and you should gain some insight into the miracle of how we think/feel/are.
Rating:
Summary: A Excellent Text for Philosophy Students
Review: The first question from "Descartes' Error" is whether the somatic marker is the first object of knowledge? A "somatic marker" is a term created by Antonio Damasio, a cognitive scientist and also a brilliant author, who refers to "the feeling about the body" (p. 173). According to Damasio, the somatic marker is an "automated detection" of things in the environment (p. 175). Similarly, according to Aquinas, the first object of human knowledge is a thing and its essence. Aquinas writes, "being and essence are what the intellect first conceives" (De Ente c. 2). Thus, Damasio's text leads to the philosophical question of whether the intellect first conceives the essence of a somatic marker? The first conception of the intellect is that which is quickly and directly apprehended by the human intellect. The intellect is the superior knowing power of the human soul that utilizes the information proceeding from the external senses and the internal senses with a special focus on the phantasm or image. Both Damasio and Aquinas are in agreement concerning the nature of the phantasm or image. However, the disagreement between Damasio and Aquinas concerns the first object apprehended by the intellect. This problem is central to investigations in the philosophy of mind. Hence, Damasio writes, "You cannot formulate and use adequate theories for your mind and for the mind of others if something like the somatic marker fails you" (p. 219).
Rating:
Summary: A Thought Provoking Work
Review: This book brings together so many of the threads of Western thought in a way that is thought provoking and provides the reader with the tools required to actually rethink these complicated but important issues. Damasio brings to the lay reader who is willing to devote some energy to understanding recent developments in neurology and brain function some important tools to re-evaluate the issues of mind body dualism. (This is the error that Damasio believes that Descartes made, the separation of mind from body.) If you believe that science has no power to shed light on thorny philosophical questions, read this book. Damasio makes a compelling case that modern studies of the brain and brain damage clearly demonstrate that the "mind" depends on complex interaction between brain and body and that emotion and rationality cannot be separated, indeed can't exist separately This book is not an easy read, but it is compelling in its argument. I found myself wanting to tell people about Damasio's arguments and examples. This is that occassional book that has the power to make the reader see mankind's place in the world in a new light. Highly recommended!
Rating: 
Summary: The Error of Cartesian People
Review: To the "December 18, 2003" reviewer: "To write a book about Philosophy or related issues one MUST HAVE a degree in Philosophy, in the same way if somebody decides to write about Neurology he/she needs to have the proper qulifications to do so." That's the typical authoritarian speech of people who hide behind their jobs, their qualifications, their deegrees, etc. Not exactly the right quote, but it describes the context: "Holier Than Thou". Yes, recognition by the expert authorities is a key to being heard, but I ask: when were these high authorities the driving force within ANY thought revolution? Maybe because someone DOESN'T have a deegree on a particular subject, he can express views which aren't tainted by the "academia's" notion of what is correct and incorrect. Most of the radical developments in human thought came without the approval of the "status quo". Ironically, the "status quo" absorves the knowledge of such revolutions when they have been tamed down or when the revolutionaries themselves have become the "status quo". You, the reviewer, might even be right about Damasio... but you used a VERY lousy argument...
Rating:
Summary: Don't Read Damasio 'Less You're Interested in Cerebating
Review: What one thinks of Damasio's lovely work, _Descartes' Error_, will largely depend on how interested one is in matters pertaining to the human brain, consciousness and the self. Additionally, one who does not have much of an appetite for technical language will probably not get very fair in this work. Much of Damasio's study is also hypothetical in nature. Therefore, I would not recommend this work to those who have little to no tolerance for abstracta or theoria. But if you are intensely intrigued by the inner workings of the human brain, this book is for you. Damasio initiates his discussion with a fascinating story about Phineas Gage, a man who had a 3 1/2 foot iron rod pass through his head and lived to tell about it. Damasio moves from Gage to other patients who have experienced damage to their frontal lobes and reviews the effect it had on their lives. He argues that reason and emotions are both needed in order for sound judgment or prudence to obtain. Finally, Damasio challenges Cartesian dualism, which posits the anthropological notion of a RES EXTENSA and RES COGITANS. Damasio winds up contending that the "self" which has received so much theoretical attention throughout human history is no doubt neural in nature, unlike Descrates envisioned it. In short, there is no self without a functioning brain in a body. At least, not on this earth. The one drawback that I find with this book is that Damasio does not spend enough time critiquing Cartesian dualism. Nevertheless, the journey that terminates in an analysis of Cartesianism is well worth the ride. Moreover, the author offers an alternative to Descartes' theory that is both compelling and thought-provoking.
|
