Rating: 
Summary: Caves and Shadows
Review: Steven Pinker's How the Mind Works is a brilliant work in which he attempts to explain what the mind is, how it evolved, and how it allows us to see, think, feel, laugh, interact, create, invent, discover, and in countless other ways function. Like Pinker's previous and highly-regarded work, The Language Instinct , How the Mind Works is authentic (indeed authoritative) in terms of its scientific content and yet readily accessible to the non-scientist. If our organs of computation are a product of natural selection (as Pinker asserts they are), then natural selection must be viewed as "the only evolutionary force that acts like an engineer, 'designing' organs that accomplish improbable but adaptive outcomes." Having thus introduced and then discussed what he calls the "standard equipment" for computation in Chapter 1, Pinker shifts his attention to Thinking Machines in Chapter 2. According to Plato, Pinker notes, "we are trapped inside a cave and know the world only through the shadows it casts upon the wall. The skull is our cave, and mental representations are the shadows. The information in an internal representation is all that we know about the world." In succeeding chapters, Pinker completes his analysis of what the mind is, how it evolved, and how it allows us to see, think, feel, laugh, interact, create, invent, discover, and in countless other ways function. Caves and shadows have existed since long before Plato formulated his allegory. It remains for the mind to be aware of them, and, to recognize (if not always resolve) the "mysteries" they suggest. Some careless readers may complain that How the Mind Works raises more questions than it answers. Pinker would probably accept that complaint as a compliment.
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. Instead, the author refers to a lot of theories and then argues much too superficially and easily about which theory is likely to 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: Hello evolutionary psychology; goodbye Freud & religion
Review: A slam-dunk. This book, along with other books in the evolutionary psychology line, have the effect of making you realize that the earth is not the center of the universe. It's exhilirating and revolutionary. Not for the faint of heart (see all the negative reviews in this list).
Rating:
Summary: One of the best books on psychology I have ever read.
Review: With clarity and ease of style, Dr. Pinker has provided us with great insight into the workings of the human mind. He reveals the limitations of our ancestors whose approach to thinking, in comparison to Dr. Pinker's observations, were mere stepping stones to a more perfect understanding.
Rating: 
Summary: Psychology finally on the right track
Review: This is a review from a visiting UFO, and we are pleased to find that the science of the mind on your planet has finally understood that your species mind has evolved! Isn't it obvious that things like pregancy sickness, religion, emotions, gambling etc etc have a biological basis, and which have been selected for and developed over time? We wish you well on you endeavours to understand your species minds in terms of evolutionary theory, but we must say it's about time. (PS Incidentally don't think all the answers are there yet, but at least you are now on the right track....).
Rating:
Summary: Very provocative; excellent place to begin study of the mind
Review: To a general reader with no background in neuroscience, I recommend this book as an excellent jumping-off point. Pinker's model of the mind is intuitively appealing, but more importantly, is backed up by exhaustive references. His style is also excellent. Many of the conclusions presented by Pinker are un-PC and therefore sure to draw fire. He presents strong evidence that Piaget was a Lamarkian, and asserts that the lack of success associated with constructivist learing (Whole Language, "New-New Math") is nothing more than the inevitable result of wrong theory. Be suspicious of those who slam-dunk the work; read Pinker, check out some of the alternative theories, and draw your own conclusions.
Rating: 
Summary: The Book Is LONG, but Interesting in Parts
Review: I have been reading this book for nearly a month now. While it is interesting at times, Pinker seems to repeat himself more than necessary. If you're looking to find out "how the mind works," I'd probably suggest choosing another book.
Rating:
Summary: I still don't know how the mind works
Review: Being an electrical engineer who knows how computers store data in silicon, I thought that a book called "How the mind works" would at least teach me how meat stores data. Well, not here. The segment about vision is quite interesting, but most of the text focuses on software. I was also disappointed with his style: by often mixing robust models with shallow speculations, I soon couldn't distinguish the two. Maybe the book is more impressive for those who haven't read Richard Dawkins or Robert Wright.
Rating: 
Summary: A pretentious piece of pseudo-science.
Review: Pinker has written a lively text, it is true. But the pretentiousness is overwhelming. He never pauses for a moment to consider the wealth of analytical-philosophical arguments against his positions, nor does he even recognise any opposition, from Wittgenstein to Baker and Hacker, which gainsay his local, Chomskian, neural-cartesian nonsense. He berates others for ignoring what he claims are scientific findings, but most of his book is just lousy philosophy of mind with a veneer of neuroscientific allusions. I found this work to be among the most intellectually dishonest works I have read in many a year. But MIT Press appears simply to nurture its own... I wonder why. Perhaps they should search further for serious referees before they release such nonsense onto the educated reading public. Pinker asks us to believe that the brain and the mind are connected. But the 'mind' is not a phenomenon, and cannot be connected to anything. It is either a vernacular notion or a theorist's reification. He nowhere considers the vast literature which stands in opposition to the science fiction he is perveying, and that is the hallmark of a pseudo-scientist and a poor scholar.
Rating:
Summary: Anyone could review the literature in the field
Review: If you are looking for a general review of the literature in the field and some comments about the work of those who practice science then this is the book for you! Of course, this is his strong point. If you want current, up to date and original work in the field look elsewhere.
| 
