How the Mind Works by Steven Pinker (PDF)

Description

A model of scientific writing: erudite, witty, and clear. —New York Review of BooksIn this Pulitzer Prize finalist and national bestseller, one of the world’s leading cognitive scientists tackles the workings of the human mind. What makes us rational—and why are we so often irrational? How do we see in three dimensions? What makes us happy, afraid, angry, disgusted, or sexually aroused? Why do we fall in love? And how do we grapple with the imponderables of morality, religion, and consciousness? How the Mind Works synthesizes the most satisfying explanations of our mental life from cognitive science, evolutionary biology, and other fields to explain what the mind is, how it evolved, and how it allows us to see, think, feel, laugh, interact, enjoy the arts, and contemplate the mysteries of life.This edition of Pinker’s bold and buoyant classic is updated with a new foreword by the author.

User’s Reviews

Reviews from Amazon users which were colected at the time this book was published on the website:

⭐Steven Pinker takes a completely scientific approach to understanding the mind and how it works, based on sound theory and a rational process. Though wordy at times, the book is well-designed and provides great insight to the inner workings of our mind.Steven Pinker’s book, “How the Mind Works”, is a study of the human brain, how it works, and why it works the way it does. In eight chapters it reconstructs the brain from the bottom up, starting from the simplest of processes and combining them into the complex thoughts and behaviors we experience. The book is as much about how the mind works as it is about evolution, Pinker’s main solution for the ‘why’. He begins with the “Standard Equipment” of the mind, how it is an organ system made up of many subunits called modules. Then, he discusses in length the Computational Theory of Mind, essentially the idea that our brains are information processing machines, not to be confused with the ‘mind as a computer’ model, which differs slightly but in very fundamental ways. With the fundamental ‘how’ taken care of, Pinker jumps headlong into the ‘why’. Over the next two chapters he gives an expert description of the theory of evolution, and his thoughts on why our brains could have evolved from an ape’s. He calls to light our ancestor’s massive devotion to visual processing in the brain, and the ability to see and understand in three dimensions, adding that most attempts to understand abstract concepts result in mapping them in 2- or 3-dimensional space (graphs, charts, etc.). He goes on to describe the benefits of increased intelligence from an evolutionary standpoint, and how it would outweigh the costs associated with it. With the basic concepts of how and why the mind works as it does, in the next few chapters he extrapolated these ideas across a number of human behaviors and abilities, on topics such as love, kinship, art and music. Finally, he ends the book with a perhaps overzealous chapter title: The Meaning of Life”. Pinker suggests that he cannot profess to know if these ideas are absolutes, and furthermore that there may be some things, such as consciousness, which we may never be able to comprehend because of the way we are made. Of course, all these claims are contingent on the Computational Theory of Mind and the Theory of Evolution, but both theories are well supported and there is no reason not to except sound rationalizations based upon them.Pinker is an academic, and it shows in his style. He tends to delve into almost excessive rigor in describing and defending his ideas on the matter at hand. At times this can make it difficult to read, especially in a casual manner, and reminds one of reading an academic journal more so than a book for the layperson – this may be due in part to the actual subject matter, which itself needs long and sometimes arduous explanation for anyone not familiar with it. Verbosity aside, the format of the book is excellent. It provides a neat step-by-step analysis of each part of the currently discussed issue, citing its pros and cons and moving successively closer to the final conclusion by rejection and substitution of ‘lesser’ theories or models with more robust ones. Then each major idea is expanded or built upon to introduce and explain higher or more complex levels of thought.Pinker essentially relies on two major theories for everything in his book: The Computational Theory of Mind and the Theory of Evolution. In fact the explanations of those two theories take up roughly one third of the book, and with good reason. Because of the way the book is structured, the underlying theories make up the meat of the message he is trying to send; everything else is simply a logical extrapolation from the rules set by the theories he bases his ideas on. Therefore the most scrutiny should be put on how he defines the rule set and how those rules are put to use.The Computational Theory of Mind is fairly straightforward. Pinker simply iterates through various models of neural circuitry and how it accomplishes a task on a very basic level. The abstract model is based on symbols, a sort of mental identifier of a concept, that are used to describe things with more complexity by combination of symbols. Each subsystem in the brain is made up of a hierarchical set of sub-subsystems which are in turn contrived of yet another set of subsystems, and so on until you reach a basic unit that is not much more than a switch, which is similar to how computer circuits work.Pinker’s application of this model to vision is quite interesting. Vision is not simply a recording like a home video, but a set of inputs that go through a tremendous amount of processing in real time throughout parallel circuits which analyze different aspects of the input. He explains these stunningly with the use of a number of optical illusions or phenomena. Most memorable being the folded sheet, which is a grid with two bends in it and a plus shape coloring. He uses an analogy of a painter, a lighting specialist and a metalworker trying to recreate that image. Each can produce the image individually, but if a supervisor utilizes each one optimally, the cost is significantly reduced. This supervisor in the analogy is the algorithm that computes the most likely rendering of what we see based on a sort of cost analysis, with more common or normal renderings being ‘cheaper’. The analogy, though simplified, is enlightening.The discussion of evolution is similarly engaging. It is a great description of why certain structures, such as his favorite, the eye, would have come to be so complex. Furthermore, he adequately dispels many misconceptions about evolution. One being that all features of an animal are adaptations to some selective force. This is simply not true, and is a gross assumption to make. Applying evolution to many cultural aspects of humanity explains a lot. Pinker shows that cohesive social groups and intelligence are potentially reciprocating stimuli for improving the other. Being a social creature requires more intelligent interaction to maintain the good of the whole and to protect oneself from any mal intent of others in the group. Similarly, higher intelligence and the ability to predict the consequences of an action allow social creatures to share resources in return for mutual protection and fidelity; an alliance. These benefits would select for more intelligent creatures over the generations. Evolution, Pinker says, has resulted in the “ultimate revenge of the nerds”. The intelligent – but weaker, smaller, and slower – animals have overtaken the large, fast, and strong, essentially by being able to plan more effectively.Unfortunately, one aspect of the mind that Pinker seems to neglect is the plasticity of the mind. Pinker seems to maintain the model of the mind as a sort of compartmentalized system with innate abilities and tasks assigned to each. However, it has been shown that this is not the case. The mind can in fact rewire itself (at any age) to learn new things, or to strengthen new or old connections. (See the studies of Paul Bach-y-Rita)Overall the book sheds an amazing new light on the world and ways we interact with it, as well as why we interact that way. With few exceptions, Steven Pinker’s presentation here is well-formed, compelling, and intriguing. If you have issue with evolutionary theory, you may have difficulty accepting much of what is postulated throughout the book. However, if approached with an open mind, the ideas within can at least make you think about the world a little differently, even if you don’t accept the content.

⭐To read some of the 1 and 2 star criticisms of this book you’d think they were expecting an infotainment book on how to understand the human brain. This is not “Dr. Oz’s Your Brain and You” pop science gibberish that you can breeze through on a weekend or which can be easily molded into a series of 10 minute sidebars for CNN. Know the intended audience before you critique the execution.The reason many of the important concepts or points are driven home with multiple, detailed (sometimes dry) examples is because they’re being written by a serious professional and academic, writing about a very complicated topic. The depth is required to really understand what is being talked about.As for the work itself, it’s a good overview of how the brain evolved the way it did and how it functions, but some chapters are better than others. It’s not surprising that the most informative and in-depth chapters are the ones that focus on aspects of perception, symbology, and language (all fall within his general area of specialization). But since so much of what we do requires or revovles around these functions this is a plus for the overall quality of the book.The chapters at the end, especially the ones related to emotions and family aspects, get pretty far afield from general brain structure and functioning (compared to earlier chapters) and as such were a little difficult to wade through, and ultimately disappointing. Those read more like basic human psychology / sociology primers; interesting, but not really brain-function specific, if I had to describe in a sentence. So for that, four stars not five.As a general criticism, there are sections where he gets pretty far “into the weeds” to drive home a point, but this is to be expected; this is a scholarly work even though it is run by a mainstream commercial publisher. Bottom line: one could fairly accuse the copy editor of not reigning the author in a few area (i.e. don’t make your point over 5 pages if you can make it in 4), but that’s a far cry from the makings of a bad book or a book made of filler (a common flaw of many popular authors today but not Pinker).In summary: if you want entertaining, easy reads, don’t buy any of Steven Pinker’s books. There are whole series of books from Oxford press and others that do this — provide 100+ page overviews of “serious topics” — try one of those instead. None of Pinker’s books are easy reads; all require some “stop and think” moments to really absorb what’s being described. Even re-reading some passages a couple times or writing notes in the margin. These books are for people who are looking for a deep understanding of a topic and are willing to struggle a bit to get there. ;- )

⭐I was really surprised to see how controversial Steven Pinker is for some people. Apparently, there is a lot of anger by some scientists. I’m not sure why. I’m not a scientist, but, I read a lot of science. It may be that he has very strong opinions that he defends well on controversial subjects. Maybe it is professional jealousy. He is free in his criticism of scientists he feels let politics influence them and it might be that this upsets some people who like them. What you get here is a survey of the psychology of the mind, and it is a pyrotechnical feat. The range of subjects, quotations and examples is astonishing. Will you learn how the mind works? Not really, because no one knows yet. But, you will get many insights into it, you will get myths shattered, suspicions gratified and more explanations than you can probably absorb. At least, I can’t absorb it all.It is not in my opinion as good a book as The Language Instinct, nor as good as The Blank Slate, which it resembles in some ways (I am reading them simultaneously, though I read TBS years ago for the first time, and you can’t help but notice the cross-over). So, I considered giving it four stars. But, then I decided, it is such a powerful performance, and so well written, that it shouldn’t get less than five stars just because he didn’t surpass himself. I have another book of his on tap and I’m going to get right to it.I will offer this minor criticism. Have you ever sat through a fireworks display that just never ended? It might have benefitted from a little tighter editing, but it seems like he just doesn’t want to leave anything out. If he knows it, he want us to know it too.

⭐Some spoilers ahead…Steven Pinker’s view is that much of what we perceive as intelligence, personality and thought is inherited; in other words is a product of evolution.Many supporters of artificial intelligence cling to a hope that the brain is made of general purpose grey matter, and that intelligence will spontaneously spring into existence if you can create the right sort of ‘connectoplasm’. Professor Pinker demolishes that hope: our brains are made up of specialised modules, the product of millions of years of evolutionPost-modern social scientists, not to mention teachers, parents and religious leaders, cling to a hope that mind and personality are social constructs, that it is not ‘all in the genes’. Professor Pinker quotes statistics that show that they are largely wrong, that genes play the key role in our character.Richard Dawkins introduced the idea of ‘memes’ and Daniel Dennett extended the idea of evolution to include non-genetic selection. Professor Pinker thinks they went too far. For Pinker, the overriding force in what it is to be human is genetic — good old Darwinian evolution.However, the book is not all negative. Chapter by chapter, Pinker picks an aspect of human behaviour, character or thought, and shows how it is the result of Darwinian selection and the ‘selfish gene’. His insights are far more cogent and persuasive than previous writers such as Freud or Jung, because of this scientific basis in evolution. Pinker really has found a key to unlock at least some of what it is to be human, and it makes his book essential reading for students of human character.To me, there are two weakness to the book, and I think they are related.Pinker addresses the idea of Consciousness, meaning his sense of there being an ‘I’, the subject of his experiences. The colour red is a range of wavelengths of light; it causes excitations in particular nerve cells; the verbal centres of the brain respond and cause his mouth to say ‘red’. But nowhere in that description is the obvious truth that Steven Pinker experienced red colour. Daniel Dennett in his excellent, if ambitiously named, book ‘Consciousness Explained’ claims that there is no such thing as the experience of red, other than that physical explanation of the wavelengths and nerve excitations. Pinker disagrees. He thinks that consciousness cannot be explained away (I think he is right). However, he asserts that it is not something that can be explained, because humans are simply not clever enough. A hyperintelligent alien might be able to explain exactly what consciousness is in humans and how it relates to the brain and the mind, but a human would not have the mental capability to understand the explanation.To me, this is a cop out. By evading the question of consciousness, Pinker leaves the door open to some pretty weird ideas (you know what I mean, you’ve probably read the books too).My related complaint is that Pinker takes his own introspective intuitions about what is happening inside his head too literally. His introspection tells him that he sees a picture of the world: so he assumes that inside his brain there is a two-and-a-bit-dimensional picture of the world mapped out in neurons, for some other piece of brain to look at. His introspection tells him that he thinks in words, though he knows it cannot be English: so he assumes that his internal thoughts are in ‘mentalese’.These intuitions are what Daniel Dennett calls the ‘Cartesian Theatre’, and for him they pave a road leading to infinite regress and incoherent ideas about consciousness.I’d love to see a book co-authored by Dennett and Pinker. They both write superbly well, and in a way that is accessible to all readers. They both start from the same scientific premises. Yet they have very different answers to some key questions. Until they write such a book together, you must read them separately. But please do — they are not right about everything, but they will lead you to a better understanding of Mind than any other writer living.

⭐Although Pinker writes very clearly and without jargon, his subject requires of the reader a certain amount of medical, anatomical and psychological knowledge. I did my best to come to terms with the subject matter, but I have to admit that I gave up at Chapter 3

⭐not the easiest book to read ( I needed to read a few pages and then put down to allow information to filter in) having said that, the information presented in this book is fascinating and has given me lots of ideas to incorporate into my day to day work.Well worth persevering with the book.

⭐I can’t recommend this highly enough, it’s not exactly an easy read at times but worth the effort. Wide ranging and challenging.

⭐Accurate description, quick delivery

Keywords

Free Download How the Mind Works in PDF format
How the Mind Works PDF Free Download
Download How the Mind Works 2009 PDF Free
How the Mind Works 2009 PDF Free Download
Download How the Mind Works PDF
Free Download Ebook How the Mind Works