Rating: 
Summary: Excellent book that elucidates many areas of the human mind.
Review: "How the Mind Works" by Steven Pinker is one ofthe best books available today about the human mind. It is wideranging, extremely well written, and has an thorough bibliography. The book gives an excellent introduction to cognitive science, which explores the human mind in terms of the composite fields of psychology, sociology, anthropology, biology, neuroscience, artificial intelligence, and philosophy. One can read the entire book, take notes, and learn as much in a week or two as one would in a semester college course(s). The central ideas of the book involve the computational theory of mind and the theory of evolution. Pinker argues that the mind is a modular, information processing, natural adaptation. In reading about current brain research, I must say that it is amazing how much scientists can learn about the brain simply from close observation of animals, children, brain injury patients, twin siblings, and computerized robots. Pinker also includes important topics such as human emotion, social relations, and the arts. ...Pinker clearly and emphatically addresses the naturalistic fallacy. The naturalistic fallacy involves deriving "ought" from "is". That is to say, the way things were is not necessarily the way things have to be or should be. He leaves plenty of room for human freewill and ethics. To sum up, an excellent book that elucidates many areas of the human mind.
Rating:
Summary: A Well-Written and Brilliant Book
Review: Although I'm leary of biological explanations for human behavior, Steven Pinker convinced me. He has two main points in the book: the mind is an incredibly complex computer, and the mind is the result of evolution. You might think that this denigrates the human mind, but Pinker shows how truly amazing our brains are. Computer scientists find it very difficult to solve problems that human minds solve easily every day, including distinguishing objects from their surroundings, recognizing faces, determining whether someone is lying, eliminating irrelevant facts to go to the crux of a problem, and, yes, making decisions. Pinker writes beautifully. He's funny, easy-to-understand, and has a huge frame of reference, pulling in references to The Simpson's, the latest brain research, and Mark Twain with equal ease. This isn't as focused as his book The Language Instinct, but that may be because the topic is so much broader.
Rating: 
Summary: THE SEXIST GENE NO 2
Review: DISCLAIMER: I write my PERSONAL opinion, using my right for free speech. I will not accept liability for speaking against the book, as i assume that AMAZON authorizes this critique. (For THE SEXIST GENE NO 1 look at Matt'Ridley's "The Red Queen" critique. This is a quick review: Pinker IS handsome, and he also IS clever, and that's why he is also commercial (i don't say this, his theory does). However i would NOT select him, as it is obvious that the above are not enough in order to have a valid view of the world. I have only read the sex-related chapter from "How the mind works" so this is NOT a comment for the whole book. I find that Pinker is prejudiced and biased by the mainstream stereotypes, and he falls into continous fallacies (no space here to refer to particular quotations). Most of his genuine or borrowed arguments are weak on scientific grounds, as they do not show more than the author's perceptions about the world, the sexes etc. This is extremely obvious and unacceptable, as a scientist is supposed to be much more objective. For example, Pinker is original (but not unique) in that except for an immense sexism towards women, he also has displayed an immense sexism towards MEN! He is venomous against "second-rate" men, you know, those "failures","losers", "sissies", that never have a go with a female! (quotations MINE, but i think they are well in context with Pinker's vocabulary). Actually his descriptions about those second-rate men would describe the average men in society as we know them, that by the way are NONE OF THE ABOVE characterizations, as by being around they have proven to be successful. In his dellirium about the merits and success of the "Best" male (taking examples from birds) Pinker forgets that the world is not made of holywood stars but of normal people. Actually i was disgusted reading the chapter, and i feel that although Pinker is charming, he is in a way my personal enemy (Sorry Steve) because he has flooded the world with biased toxic pop-sci products that create or enhance negative public attitudes. I cannot forgive the fact that he encourages sexism in my social environment, and i certainly do not fit his poor descriptions of women and his awkward "explanations" about women's psychology. My impression of the book was that he quickly cited who had published something flashy about the subject, and assembled them in a new chapter without any much scrutiny, as this is only a chapter of a big book. I think he should get better informed about what his "opponents" say, and refer to them, instead of using arbitrarily collected "knowledge" as if it was the only doctrine in the scientific world. This is just scientifically incorrect, bad practice, and it is surprising he did it, as he knows so many things. Also i find that he has underplayed the role of music (in another chapter of the same book): Because he cannot explain it with his frame of mind, he just gives a quick and unpersuasive clue to why we like music. If it does't fit the theory, we ignore it or underplay it eh? More to come someday, Maria-Stella Aloupie Biologist
Rating: 
Summary: Not enough
Review: As I'm not that good with the english language I'll be brief. If you have read ANYTHING about the brain and it's ability to function as it does, this book doesn't add anything! The theories he favors doesn't always make sense or perhaps I'm just dense. As I have plowed through some other literature on this subject, I hope not... Anyways, please try some other books on this difficult subject to get better insight.
Rating:
Summary: If Pinker launches an IPO, could I buy some shares in him
Review: Workwise, we dabble in mobile robotics and artificial neural networks and such. Suffice to say various people in the office liked the book enough to buy additional copies and gratuitously hand them out to others to read. Which must speak louder than words. Exceptionally clear prose and compelling arguments. All we can find to criticise is the man's haircut. Get your hair cut, steven. You can afford it solely on the basis of sales to us.
Rating:
Summary: How the Mind Works
Review: I thoroughly enjoyed this book. It certainly covered a lot of territory; including computor technology, evolution, art, scientific thinking, society and socialization, etc. Mr. Pinker was able to take even a comparative novice through his arguments regarding human and artificial intelligence, primarily by showing the complexity of the task of creating the "awareness" of human intelligence in the latter (or even of the advisability of it). He also gave a lucid account of why humans think as they do--that is, not always as the scientist might advise--and how this might have arisen evolutionarily. It is not a book to be read quickly, however, especially by the nonprofessional, as it is densely packed with information and requires (and deserves) time to consider it all.
Rating:
Summary: WHOA!
Review: So...........Just when I was getting a feel for the insanity we call life; coming to easy terms with the coexistence of creation and evolution, Mr. Pinker has asked me to strech my mind further to imagine all creation ( excuse me, looks like some new names are in order, too:the evolved?existence?that whut is?) is a wonderful product of solely evolution. So, in order to give honest consideration to such a daring and revolutionary concept I must bring my mind back to the state of quest and question, yea angst, I had to endure in freshman year of college: where does all of this come from? Do I even exist or am I solely a cosmic soap opera, percieved existence in the mind of ? Sort of a cosmic "Truman show"? To begin, as they say, at the beginning, I suppose we must assume at some point early in the continuum of time (does time exist?) a void we can call empty space. Then inferring from what "appears" obvious we must also assume spontaneous appearance of matter, perhaps in the form of atoms, forming molecules forming elements forming matter, spontaneously aligning to some uncreated algorithm to evolve over billions of years (do years exist?) into MAN......... Maybe. I'll chuck it all over for a beer, friends, a woman that doesn't try to "improve" me, and occasional heart-hazardous BBQ. But to my point: Is there any point in continuing past page 180 of "Mind Works" if I can't wrap my mind around that proposal? Or are there separate nuggets there not requiring predication?
Rating:
Summary: parsimonious wit
Review: I admit that I have not finished this book yet. But I simply can't take it .. I have to tell anyone reading this to drop what they are doing and buy this book. I am knocked out by Pinker's wit and presentation, not to mention the fact that it covers just about the most fascinating topic imaginable. Sure it is an overview, and mainly of other people's work. Sure it is accessible to a wide audience. I don't see these as inherent faults. It is delightful to read, he is clear about when he is being speculative and when he is presenting facts supported by clear evidence (eliminating the validity of any pseudoscience claims). How the Mind Works is an excellent introduction to the subject of evolutionary psychology, a field that is exciting in part b/c of the elegance of the theories it generates, which are turning out to be right. Evolutionary Psychology is doing what Philosophy wishes it could do.
Rating: 
Summary: Great title but a long, bland book.
Review: Oatmeal. After reading along patiently for a certain distance you begin to realize the author is not, after all, ever going to tell you how the mind works. On this same general subject I thought The Prehistory of the Mind, by Steven Mithun, was more fun and had some turns and surprises.
Rating:
Summary: Central questions of universe tackled
Review: I believe that this book is one of the best I've ever read (I was also very impressed with the Language Instinct). Pinker endeavors to answer the questions that philosophers have been tackling for centuries. He makes very poignant arguments based on logic, common sense, and knowledge in many different areas. This book certainly made me look at the world in new ways - and isn't that the point? This book got at the core issues of mankind. Pinker tries to put the chaos in a hierarchy, show method to the madness, and expose the patterns of the world. This book is of course not enough to disclose the mysteries of the universe, but it is one big step in that direction. I highly recommend it.
|
