Rating: 
Summary: Damasio's Error
Review: I don't recommend this book to anybody. It is the best way to deceive a reader about history of philosophy and particularly about Descartes. Not only his author does not have the academic qualifications in order to talk about Descartes but also whatever he says about him is a distortion and a over-simplification about Dualism and Descartes' philosophy of mind. 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. It is a shame this book was published and translated into 17 languages. Before bying this book along with his other book about Spinoza, you first and learn about the book reviews it did receive in the first place, but make sure the reviewers were PHILOSOPHERS and not Damasios' friends and colleages from thje biological and medical field, who do not have a clue about what the heck they are talking about either. Good luck in your reading--anyways.
Rating: 
Summary: Brain, Mind and Soul
Review: I read this book shortly after leaving a religious group. This book did more than any other to show how the idea of a "soul" is an error at best, and that the solution to the "mind/body problem" is that the mind and body are, in essence, one thing. This book should be required reading for anyone who has ever even contemplated the idea that the "mind" is somehow seperate from the body.
Rating:
Summary: unreadable and boring
Review: I think, the author was not sure, whether he wanted to write a popular science book or a scholarly treatise. The first goal he clearly missed, I cannot judge the second one, being a layperson myself.
The book is full of neurotechnical jargon -one reviewer has quoted a very typical sentence. Credits are given over almost entire pages, certainly distracting, if you want to write a popular science book.
Authors like Steven Pinker prove, that this subject can also be addressed in an interesting manner.
In exasperation, I quit after about 150 pages.
Rating:
Summary: Delivers on its claims
Review: I thought the book was splendid and did me a world of help in understanding just how important the brain as an organ is to understanding how we experience the world.As for the other reader who corrected the author's spelling: it didn't need correction. "Descartes" is not plural, the reader correctly stated. However, that it irrelevant. When a name ends in "s", it's a matter of choice whether one uses apostrophe-S or just puts an apostrophe after the "s" that the name ends in.
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: We are intelligent because we are emotional beings
Review: In this brilliant, enjoyable book, Damasio demonstrates how being "rational" isn't equivalent to being intelligent. Emotions and "gut feelings" are a big part of the decision making process. It will be an intelligent decision for brain scientists, politicians, philosophers, economists, historians, sociologists, physicians, biologists and Wall Street traders to read and mediate about Damasio's book. Ate la vista Descartes. Paulo Andre, MD
Rating:
Summary: Worth the money and time
Review: It is interesting to hear a scientist talk about emotions having value. This is good approach to complex issue that may never be resolved. Question will always remain, what lies beneath the facts, and can we ever be sure that we didn't alter reality by studying it. Good for people to see into some research that talks of emotions as worthwhile in ever expanding one world order and monochrome lifestyles. Maybe the best foot in the door to introducing joy into your life and those of others (and sorrow and other emotions),
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: promising prospects for the somantic-marker hypothesis
Review: The somantic marker hypothesis in this book shows alot of intrest in my view. After reading i have never looked at thinking in 'rationality' in the same light. Damasio argues that with just rationality one will end up displaying as much irrationality as one with just emotion. Occuring because in acting in pure reason the mind cannot calculate all possible outcomes and will spend ridiculous time on the simplest problems. shown by a patient with prefrontal damage who ended up debating for 30 min the simple question of when to go to an appointment. The only complaint i have of the book is it goes of topic much. into such things as the absurdity of dualism and such. Also alot will be confusing without knowledge of neuroscience. Buy this book if intrested in human thinking
|
