Rating: 
Summary: Gives a good framework for the issue...
Review: ...but incomplete. In this book and in "Mapping the Mind", Carter tends to side w/ the deterministic interpretation of human behavior. She outlines her reasons for thinking so--namely, the dissonance between our consciousness and reality (we are aware of phenomena 1/2 second passed their occurence) and the infamous Libet's experiment--but there is evidence that the brain's neurons CAN adapt and reform new networks, what is called neuroplasticity. Jeffrey Schwartz' book "The Mind and The Brain" proves that there is a "Will", a "Mind", that can choose to change the way the "Brain" interprets the world. See that book for its proofs on neuroplasticity.
This book neglects to mention the arguments in favor of neuroplasticity, so it is incomplete. Nonetheless, this book does serve a purpose--it gives a good overview of most of the theories of consciousness, it outlines the purposes of the regions of the brain (a good dose of neuroscience never hurt anyone, although Mapping the Mind is more in depth in this area), and it offers the arguments and evidence in favor of determinism. I think it is recommended on those merits, although maybe not at the list price. I read it via the library, but I could go for it for less than 10 bucks. This is a good book for any college student, the layman psychologist, the layman philosopher, the know-it-all wannabe who shows of his knowledge to get chicks, and the science fiction writer who emphasizes the soft sciences.
Rating: 
Summary: Utterly Fascinating
Review: Consciousness. What is it? How can the coordinated firing of billions of neurons, through trillions of synaptic connections, create an experience of the world around us? And what about Self-Consciousness? What is the "I" that we all envision when our thoughts turn inward?Exploring Consciousness is a richly illustrated, state-of-the-art text that explains the latest consciousness-related research and theories in terms anyone can understand. In chapter 4, for example, the author draws a clever airship analogy, where inter-passenger communication and observations mimic the cognitive processes in the human brain. The latest consciousness-related research and brain imaging studies show that neural activation produces a representation of reality within our brains, and it is this representation that we call consciousness. Exploring Consciousness goes a long way towards constructing a coherent picture of what is actually happening in the brain each time a moment of consciousness is experienced. --David Hitchcock, author, VIRTUAL LIFE and PATENT SEARCHING MADE EASY
Rating:
Summary: True genius!
Review: I loved every page of this book! It really opened my "eye" to the field of consciousness. A great read!
Rating: 
Summary: Do Not Trust This Book
Review: I urge you not to read this book simply because it will lie to you. Rita Carter is not a scientist and not qualified to write about the things she does in this book. As a result, there are many errors. For example: A) She explains that when an atom gains an electron it becomes positively charged... I don't know where she was during that grade 9 science class. B) There is a diagram of the nervous system in which the left brain is attached to the left half of the body... What was the first thing you learned about the two hemispheres? C) She explains an experiment that showed that babies are born with a fear of heights. I just saw a video of that experiment in psychology class and it actually came to the conclusion that babies are not born with a fear of heights, although they do have depth perception, but they quickly learn to be afraid of them. It's also poorly organized and focuses mainly on the 'wacky' ideas about consciousness rather that taking an objective look at it. There is a great book on the same subject called CONSCIOUSNESS: A USER'S GUIDE, by Zeman. The author is a neuroscientist, the book is much more organized, he covers all the scientific and philosophical arguments to date in a very clear and concise manner, it is very well written, he includes a chapter on just the nervous system for lay readers, unlike Rita Carter he sources all his information and diagrams, he gives suggestions for further reading,...
Rating:
Summary: "You" could be changed by this book.
Review: In her book, Mapping The Mind, award winning science journalist Rita Carter did an excellent job of explaining the current state of knowledge about the brain and how it functions and determines our behavior. She describes how different parts of our brain are involved in the sensory experience of the world and giving rise to the many aspects of our behavior and ultimately to our sense of self. In Exploring Consciousness, she takes on the more difficult task of explaining ideas of how the sense of self develops and the state of consciousness of the self arises. The study of consciousness is in some respects an esoteric form of navel gazing, and it is very easy to get your knickers in a knot trying to figure out what consciousness really is. Fortunately, in this book Rita Carter does a brilliant job of interpreting and explaining the many ideas that have arisen both in the past and present to explain what neuroscience calls the "hard problem". In true journalistic fashion she objectively presents many different points of view of consciousness ranging from Western materialistic (neuro-scientific), Cartesian (man and god dualism), and Eastern mysticism (oneness with the universe). She is at her best, however, when explaining how the brain can give rise to consciousness and a sense of self as the result of its complex wiring and how it is totally integrated with bodily functions. Many of the scientists from whose work she draws on, get to speak for themselves (some more clearly than others) in mini-essays. Her own "religious" experiences have made her reluctant to fully accept a materialistic view of consciousness, but she goes on to create a very rationale explanation of how such experience could arise from the normal workings of the brain. The chapter on "Fractured Consciousness", which describes some of the types of mental disorders that can arise when consciousness goes beyond what we consider normal, is particularly fascinating. Many strange mental phenomena such as multiple personality, fugue (a form of amnesia in which people lose memory of themselves), and schizophrenia are given quite a rational explanation when described in terms of the physical and chemical malfunctions that can develop in the brain. The book is illustrated with many spectacular mystical color images created by Moonrunner Designs Limited which help to convey the sense that our knowledge of what constitutes the mind is far from complete. The artist, (Malcolm Godwin?), who created them, should have received some sort of award or special acknowledgement from the author. I did find the organization of the book to be somewhat annoying, as the mini-essays are inserted into the main chapter text and disrupt the reading. They should have been grouped between chapters. Also, although the coated paper used for the book is excellent for reproducing the pictures, it creates glare and interferes with the reading of text. Anyone reading this book will be able to identify with the many observations the author makes about how we perceive ourselves, and it also gives us a glimpse of what may be happening in the mind of others. All in all, a great book.
Rating:
Summary: The brain is revealing its secrets.
Review: In this excellent overview of current research (2003) into the brain, Rita Carter, a medical journalist, certainly has her finger on the pulse (or is that prefrontal cortex?). Although dealing with very difficult concepts, Ms Carter has done an admirable job in simplifying it for the non-brain specialist, like myself. Nevertheless it can still be a challenging read at times. The book begins by introducing the idea that our experience is not necessarily the same as the external world. The first chapter concerns discussion of "the stream of illusion". Like `constant vision', our experience of `constant consciousness' appears to be a merging of projected separate experiences -as in a film. (The quality thereof partly depending on the acting, one of which incidentally, is you). "The construction of our experience depends on merging the consciousness of one moment into the next" (p18). In both our experience of vision and consciousness therefore, some processing selection, by the brain, is implied. There is also a time gap. 1/5 of a second apparently passes between vision received by the brain, and our experience of it (p25). It is similar with our experience of consciousness, ie the 'illusion of immediacy' (p27). It is stated here that we apparently experience our lives (ie consciousness) 1/2 second out of sync with the external world (p29). (If you don't understand how tennis players return serves under this arrangement-don't worry-the brain just projects the real-time (but unconscious) return to us, and then backdates our experience of it, apparently (p29)). Our tendency to miss things in our visionary field we are not 'primed' for is termed "inattentional blindness", whilst "change blindness", is when one fails to notice any change in their visual field, which can be surprisingly significant. (Sound like someone you know?). Similar `misses' also apply to consciousness, and therefore also to beliefs etc. At least 6 main ideas of consciousness are outlined-'property dualism' that mind is an aspect of matter, 'identity'-that mind=matter, 'agnostic'-that consciousness and matter are the one thing but not understood, 'emergence-that mind emerges from physical processes but is not identical to them, 'functionalism'-that mind is a process, and 'Cartesian dualism'-that mind and matter are two different things. Add to this 'panpsychism-everything has a 'spark' of life' or 'mind', elimativism, identity theory (eg Searle), and mysterians-those who believe we just can't figure out what consciousness is because we don't have the equipment to understand it, like a cat just can't do calculus (at least we don't think so)- the list goes on and on, providing endless hyper-activity for many philosophers, which is not altogether a bad thing. Monism-the idea that consciousness and the observed universe are one, (and send your money to the following address to receive this Holy Oneness...sorry couldn't resist) is opposed to dualism -consciousness and the external world being two different things. Simple, except that The Matrix Has You. First order and higher order theories of consciousness are discussed, in which `doubling up' of knowledge is suggested to generate the experience of consciousness-the higher order of `awareness' essentially being a representation of a representation. (The problem of infinite regress here could be nullified by the brain (?)). Despite some contrary views, words are not essential for self-monitoring (p36). Einstein once said something like-"most of my thoughts are in concepts, not words". I happen to agree entirely-implying that words are essential for thought seems like ... nonsense to me. One intriguing concept brought out by recent research is whether something that is emergent can have effects that work *downwards*, a concept sort of new to science. p69-"But if consciousness is something else- the non- physical thing it seems to be, there is no obvious way, given what we know of the material universe, that it can affect a change in the underlying brain state". (I actually disagree). Other discussions include: consciousness as an emergent brain property, the concept of the quale (experience of eg `red'), the Chinese Room, the self, 'backrooms of the brain', (eg autistic savants and enhanced special abilities), the delayed maturity of the human prefrontal cortex (making us rather silly as teenagers?), bottom up and top down processing within the brain (similar to how social organisations function), petit mal (temporary unconsciousness), 'free will' and readiness potential (sounds like 'free will battery' to me-p85), spandrels (Mr Gould) and consciousness are also given punctuated adaptive discussion (yours truly), and are we ultimately super egotistical zombies-that is machines which have the contrived vanity to think they are something other than machines? p96-99. I'll let you decide. And finally, spirituality. Suggested here to be just another brain function (I agree, but a small kernel of doubt remains), despite much emotive appeal to the contrary. And what about formalised (and politicised) spirituality, ie 'religion'? Hardly gets a mention in this book, as it also didn't in Ms Carter's other very good book 'Mapping the Mind'. ('The God Part of the Brain' is a useful read in this field, incidentally). Methinks the neuroscientists are avoiding discussing this topic-too many thorns in that briar patch- evidently. And yet, spirituality and religion IS one of the things the brain consistently does, and this book IS about brain research. (Whether one is for or against 'religion' is not the issue, understanding brain processes behind it can only help to reduce obvious problems associated with it). There is a gaping vacuum here in brain research, I suggest. And we know what nature thinks of vacuums. Something to think about. I also would have liked to see more evolutionary biology, but otherwise a very good overview.
Rating:
Summary: Wonderfully accessible treatment
Review: Rita Carter does a marvelous job of surveying all the major issues in consciousness studies. Carter is a journalist, and she's helped along the way with interleaved special sections written by the scientists themselves. The book's design is first-rate, making the whole thing wonderfully accessible. Highly recommended.
Rating:
Summary: Wonderfully accessible treatment
Review: Rita Carter does a marvelous job of surveying all the major issues in consciousness studies. Carter is a journalist, and she's helped along the way with interleaved special sections written by the scientists themselves. The book's design is first-rate, making the whole thing wonderfully accessible. Highly recommended.
Rating:
Summary: Recommended for a wide range of interdisciplinary studies
Review: The nature and purposes of human consciousness and thought are probed in Exploring Consciousness, a superbly prensented academic inquiry which deftly blends science and philosophy to consider whether consciousness is an illusion or a byproduct of brain functioning. This scholarly discussion blends the latest hypotheses on consciousness, using the latest discoveries of how the brain functions to provide insights on how consciousness creates time and perception. A lively discourse, recommended for a wide range of interdisciplinary studies.
Rating:
Summary: READ THIS, IF NOTHING ELSE, ON CONSCIOSUNESS
Review: The scientific study of consciousness has become an independent field already. No more can an author start a work on the subject complaining about how little is known, or how the subject is ignored, or how mystery surround the whole enterprise. Data on consciousness seems to come out of every laboratory, and new books are published monthly dealing specifically with consciousness and its physical basis. Given that this is roughly the state of the field, this book arrives in percfect timing, as quite possibly the first "real" textbook of the science of consciousness. True, there have been many popular books on the subject, and amazingly complete collections of both philosophical and scientific issues relating to consciousness. But in most of these, researchers advance their personal theories, or philosophers argue in favour of various diferent positions, and at the end leave one with only one side of the debate, or with too specific information that one cannot put toghether into a larger picture. This book, however, is diferent. Carter remains mostly objective, and manages to go over most of the major points of the dificult subject that is consicousness. As in any other textbook, of course, what is sacrified is detail. Everything ranging from embodiement, neuropsychology, neuroscience, the self, agency and ownerhsip, psi research and the quantum, philosophy and the hard problem, is given space and is covered adequately. All of this would be meaningless if it was not as clearly explained, and the book as clearly written, as was possible. Carter managed this and more. If the layperson was to read only one book on the subject, I am convinced it should be this one. The layout of the book adds to its value. In between the text are various illustrations that, well, illustrate various points. There are also little esays by prominent figures in the field that go into more specific sub-issues. These are I think both helpful and flawed. Helpful, because they aquaint the newcomer with some important matters, but flawed because thay are so brief as to leave out other equaly important matters. Not all can be praise, however. Carter first and most obvious flaw in writting is her incredibly small bibliography and citation, that gives the impression the author is not familiar with the literature. The chapter on the evolution of consicousness, for example, draws almost exclusively from work done by Nicholas Humphrey. His work is brilliant, but how forget Mandler, Denton, Donald, McPhail, among many, many others. The chapters on consicousness and the brain are good, but given that there are dozens of books on that specific issue, it seemed a bit plain. No mention of neruochemical theories, of the work of Weiskrantz, Baars, Newman, Delacour, Taylor, Cotterill, among many, many others. All of this is related as well with some little errors in content, like for example (and this is recurring) the claim that no visual consciousness can exist without v1 (area). Crick and Kotch, Lumer and ffytche, Weiskrantz, all have done experimental work that says otherwise. Finally, there is the hard problem and psi research. Psi research should always be arround when one talks about consciousness, and so should quantum theories of consicousness. Carter almost only passingly mentions these fields, and the book is not a good introduction to these two sub-issues. Carter also constantly says not much can be said about the hard problem, about qualia. I think this is wrong, and showed to be so by data she presents in the book itself. If qualia are correlated to brain activity, transcranial stimulation of that brain area shown to cause that qualia, and damage of it shown to abolish qualia, is this not just a couple of steps away from understannding what qualia is all about? I am going to be optimistic and say that it is.
|
