Rating: 
Summary: Well written hand waving
Review: This book is well written. But without reference to specific neural structures in his reverse engineered brain, it is difficult to really take seriously.
Rating:
Summary: Some modesty is in place
Review: Mr. Pinker states his case quite well (though he repeats his ideas over and over again in the book) . The ideas themselves are not new, but the evidence he gives for them is interesting. That said, some modesty would not be out of place. To Mr. Pinker, how the brain works is almost clear, but if only things were so simple ... Also, some more serious references to other opinions (such as Mr. Penrose's) are in order.
Rating: 
Summary: Don't Even Pick It Up
Review: Another university professor who can't write and can't organize. A promising thesis to connect physical and psychological workings of the mind, but this book needs a good editor.
Rating: 
Summary: simplistic
Review: As far as I know, in America today no other writer on psychology possesses the remarkable power of exposition that Pinker does. He is indeed the ideal popularizer, and it is no surprise that his books sell so well. What the general reader doesn't know, however, is how much he simplifies and distorts the picture by a peculiar principle of selection--waving away everything that contradicts what he has to say and embracing anything that supports his theories. This plus his remarkable ignorance of neurobiology create a very narrow-minded and biased account of the topics he does discuss. Therefore, although I am a supporter of the computational and evolutionary approach advocated in this book, I would in fact urge beginning readers to avoid reading it. Much of HOW THE MIND WORKS is pure sophistry, designed to sway the reader to his side via rhetoric, not science. Readers beware.
Rating:
Summary: Nicely written, but overlong and misleading
Review: An example of the narrow-mindedness encouraged by Pinker's computational brain:In the middle of the book Pinker cites Lakoff (1987) and a few of the examples given in the latter's _Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things_ to show that the traditional criterial-attribute model of categorization is incorrect. Now, the well-read reader knows what Lakoff was trying to demonstrate; that classical logic is inadequate when it comes to explaining how people categorize. Much of his book is devoted to showing the many interesting ways people actually do categorize. It's all centered around Eleanor Rosch's prototype theory, and the significant factor played in best examples of a category, radial categorization, metaphor, metonomy, etc., etc. Pinker's "refutation" of Lakoff's examples is amazing. Without mentioning prototype theory (there or in the entire book), he argues that Lakoff's mistake is not realizing that such fuzzy categories are the result of "idealizations". Having satisfied the ignorant reader that Lakoff is on the wrong track, Pinker moves on to other topics. But the hypocrisy is obvious. Pinker's concept of an "idealization" is not too far removed from Rosch's "prototype"!And in the process of ignoring the vast empirical data in support of how minds *really* categorize, Pinker feels safe to remain in the classical framework of categorization. Since I cannot believe that Pinker is ignorant of what Lakoff was actually talking about in his book, or the work of Rosch, I must conclude that by avoiding the real issues behind prototype theory he was being deliberately deceptive. And he is a very charismatic writer and speaker, so his popularizations have a better chance of reaching the public than the sometimes admittedly dense and verbose _Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things_. He leaves his readers with a biased report on the state of cognitive science, using what appears to me to be outright deception in the process, such as in the above example.
Rating:
Summary: A Few Good Jokes, A Few Interesting Remarks - But That's All
Review: The idea of Mr Pinker's book is brilliant. Who has never wondered about how it all works, the chemistry, the physics, perhaps even the METAphysics of the human mind. Therefore, it is really a shame that the author puts such an effort in spreading around humouristic references to make the reader keep going, that he often loses the point. It IS a good effect in the writing procedure to kick in some unexpectedly contra-academic examples from Calvin & Hobbes, from Woody Allen or from Monty Python - but the sad thing is that these humouristic kicks really are the PEAKS in 'How The Mind Works'. The reader never really gets a fully reliable explanation of the mind's mystery attics, narrow paths, and dark alleys. In stead, the author refers to a lot of theories and then argues much too superficially and easily about which theory is likely be right, according to him. 'How The Mind Works' has a superb idea - an idea with a great potential and therefore enormous potential public... if it is developped further and into something more thoroughly, profoundly and reliable.
Rating: 
Summary: cop-out on consciousness
Review: Pinker's book argues for combining the computational theory of mind with the brain as an evolutionary adaptation. He shows how perception, intelligence, emotions, and culture, can be explained as computational modules evolved by humans to solve problems of hunter-gatherer life. His "hothead" theory on the origin of emotions was new to me and interesting. However, Pinker cops out by exempting consciousness from his analysis of the mind; he suggests that the human mind will never be able to understand its own consciousness. This makes no sense in terms of his own analysis. It struck me that Pinker's cop-out on consciousness parallels the cop-out of Chomsky on language as an evolutionary adaptation, which Pinker complained about at the beginning of "The Language Instinct".
Rating:
Summary: Well researched book on human perceptions
Review: A really fine book on human perceptions that I think serves well an open minded and inquisitive person. I think it could be controversial for anyone who will not be open minded as they read the book. It highly illustrates the metaphorical phrase that a fish discovers water last. We have difficulty perceiving our own environment because we are part of it and cannot survive outside of it so we accept it without question. It is a book that I will return to read again with a more scholarly eye and a note pad beside me to catch the many nuances that play upon each other. Also, I found myself reaching for my dictionary several times which is just not something I have to do often. I think it is a book best sought by self characterized philosophers and linguists but I think it will also serve well for managers of people, sales people and anyone who wants to understand themselves better in order to understand other people. It goes deep into the heart of Stephen Covey's ha! bit 5, "Seek first to be understood...then to be understood" of The 7-Habits of Highly Effective People. I recommend the book but not to those who do not have good reading skills.
Rating:
Summary: an immensely enjoyable read
Review: I was looking for a good first book to break into literature dealing with the mind. I couldn't have been more pleased with this book. It fit remarkably well with other books I've recently read (D.Dennet-Darwin's Dangerous Idea,R.Dawkins- Climbing Mount Improbable). The computational theory of mind makes such wonderful sense and Pinker's book not only describes the theory in lucid detail but also gives an account of the current-state-of-things. I particularly enjoyed the descriptions of how the various conclusions that the book is based upon are drawn experimentally. I take comfort in thinking that feelings,emotions, and the ability to think are not the result of unexplainable magic but are very real products of the evolution of the mind. I decided on my next few reads based on the reference section; however, I've decided to first read another Pinker book The Language Instinct. This decision is based entirely on my enjoyment of Pinker's sharp, witty and thoroughly enjoyable writing.
Rating: 
Summary: the computational theory of the functionning of the mind
Review: Halfway the pragmatic lucidity of Albert Camus ("Le Mythe de Sisyphe", Gallimard, Paris,19510 and the skeptic quietism of Emil Cioran (who wrote the impressive handbook of anti-psychotherapy:"Précis de Décomposition", Gallimard, Paris, 1949), some promising signs of renewal, if not of a real revolution in the field of Psychotherapy and Psychoanalysis begin to sprout. That's the Evolutionary Psychology, resuming the first and misread books on "Sociobiology"by E.O.Wilson to re-produce them in a more accessible language for a non-academic public, introducing its researches and hypotheses in a sound, clear and good-humored way. Among the leading authors of this brand new stream of thought, some of them have already written several books that in a few years became classics. That's the case, for instance, of Dawkins, R. ("The Selfish Gene", "The Extended Phenotype"and "The Blind Watchmaker"); Wright, R.("The Moral Animal"): the very Wilson, E.O.("Consilience"), and Pinker, S. ("The Language of Instinct"), not to mention dozens of others. The sociologist Philip Rieff's pessimistic concerns about the future of a culture that would be once more, and perhaps definetely dying (Rieff, P.: "Fellow Teachers: of Culture and its Second Death") begin to seem less unavoidable than at the time he has written down his discontents. As a major instance of these hopes, let's take the recently released "How the Mind Works", by Steven Pinker, Norton, New York, 1997. This scholar is professor of Psychology and director of the Center for Cognitive Neuroscience at the Massachussets Institute of Technology. He proposes and realizes in his book an extensive revision of the theories about the funcionning of the mind; departing from a most original thesis, that of "reverse engineering", he tries (successfully) to understand the manner how was built and functions the engine(the mind) by learning from i! nferences drawn out of the observations of its products(emotions, actitudes, drives, morals, arts and more), keeping as background and reference the computational theory of the functionning of the brain. Bloom,H. and Rosenberg, D. had already in "The Book of J" skimmed off the sacred from the bible, to approach its literary text plainly; now Pinker, S. starts to skip the divinity of science by the plain research on the physical, accessible structure os its creator, the mind, so that very few room is left for pseudo-prophets, like C.G.Jung and W.Reich, and their religions in disguise pretending to be psychology. More and more we move towards the assertions by Albert Camus that we ought to imagine a brave happy Sisyphus, who defies the gods that imposed him the absurd penalty of a senseless living, by living it in defiant human happiness.
|
