Scan barcode
sharrypdx's review against another edition
3.0
Interesting book, but he refers to images so often that I wish I had the book in my hands to see what he was talking about.
raulmazilu's review against another edition
5.0
A book chock-full of fascinating questions coupled with even more intriguing answers. Why are we self-aware? What makes us perceive the world the way we do? What can we learn about the inner workings of our minds from people suffering from synesthesia or phantom limb syndrome? Is Buddhism right in claiming that there is no separation between the self and others around us? Or that the mind and body are not one, not two -- but both one and two simultaneously?
A phenomenal read which I highly recommend to all owners of a brain.
A phenomenal read which I highly recommend to all owners of a brain.
emiann2023's review against another edition
5.0
Oh this was such a great book. I felt like I learned so much. I hope Dr. Ramachandran writes another book. I'd like to know what other advancements have been made since this was published.
iggnaseous's review against another edition
3.0
Offers some insights into how the brain works, especially vision. Portions are pedantic, and go into tedious details about how studies/discoveries were made.
dharaiter's review against another edition
5.0
It's very hard to express the experience I felt while reading this book, so I am going to sum this up in a few pointers and a quote. Two HUGE life lessons I am taking from this book-
1. Henceforth, I am never going to say, "Humans are just apes".
2. I am not going to believe that we are being self-important when we try to preserve ourselves and our species.
"It makes the mind reel. How can a three-pound mass of jelly that you can hold in your plan imagine angels, contemplate the meaning of infinity, and even questions its own place in the cosmos? Your brain can not only ponder the very stars that gave it birth but can also think about its own ability to think and wonder about its own ability to wonder."
1. Henceforth, I am never going to say, "Humans are just apes".
2. I am not going to believe that we are being self-important when we try to preserve ourselves and our species.
"It makes the mind reel. How can a three-pound mass of jelly that you can hold in your plan imagine angels, contemplate the meaning of infinity, and even questions its own place in the cosmos? Your brain can not only ponder the very stars that gave it birth but can also think about its own ability to think and wonder about its own ability to wonder."
lizshayne's review against another edition
informative
medium-paced
3.0
3. Also known as the average of 5 and 1, which is basically what this book is.
There are two super important caveats, one of which Ramachandran himself *says* but then fails to follow it and the other of which he is unaware.
1) When all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail. When all you have is neural connections, everything looks like (the interaction between) areas in the brain.
2) Ramachandran is entirely unfamiliar with the then prevalent and now even larger body of literature discussing models of disability beyond the medical and the "novel" idea that the wide diversity of human beings should be understood as ideal rather than a maladaptation to be corrected.
Obviously this came up most upsettingly in his discussion of autism (I braced for that chapter) and the way it was so clear to me that he was missing the value in what autistic people are actually good at in the process of tracking down which neurons are responsible for our failures. A less biased researcher might wonder take seriously the question of why it's valuable to a society to have people with varying levels of mirror neuron sensitivity and how having humans who cannot be easily convinced to follow others might also be valuable. But from within the medical model that sees variation as defect, it's impossible to have that conversation.
Having said that, the research itself is super interesting in terms of how the brain actually functions and how conscious experience is determined on a neural level. As with much in science, it's the imposition of the researcher's a priori perspective on the data that creates issues rather than the data itself. And, again, Ramachandran KNOWS this because he's not subtle in his digs at obnoxious colonial scientists who fail to appreciate what Indian art is doing. And in the process of skewering that perspective for what it fails to see, he steps into the same trap when it comes to ableism.
The aesthetics section was my favorite part of the book, though, and why I had picked it up in the first place. I particularly love the ways that art creates things that are more thing-y than the real thing and that is why we love it. I think I was already wondering, back in 2012 when I first encountered his work, how it applies to narrative and I think it's an even stronger question now that enhances, rather than explains, stories and why I love them.
There are two super important caveats, one of which Ramachandran himself *says* but then fails to follow it and the other of which he is unaware.
1) When all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail. When all you have is neural connections, everything looks like (the interaction between) areas in the brain.
2) Ramachandran is entirely unfamiliar with the then prevalent and now even larger body of literature discussing models of disability beyond the medical and the "novel" idea that the wide diversity of human beings should be understood as ideal rather than a maladaptation to be corrected.
Obviously this came up most upsettingly in his discussion of autism (I braced for that chapter) and the way it was so clear to me that he was missing the value in what autistic people are actually good at in the process of tracking down which neurons are responsible for our failures. A less biased researcher might wonder take seriously the question of why it's valuable to a society to have people with varying levels of mirror neuron sensitivity and how having humans who cannot be easily convinced to follow others might also be valuable. But from within the medical model that sees variation as defect, it's impossible to have that conversation.
Having said that, the research itself is super interesting in terms of how the brain actually functions and how conscious experience is determined on a neural level. As with much in science, it's the imposition of the researcher's a priori perspective on the data that creates issues rather than the data itself. And, again, Ramachandran KNOWS this because he's not subtle in his digs at obnoxious colonial scientists who fail to appreciate what Indian art is doing. And in the process of skewering that perspective for what it fails to see, he steps into the same trap when it comes to ableism.
The aesthetics section was my favorite part of the book, though, and why I had picked it up in the first place. I particularly love the ways that art creates things that are more thing-y than the real thing and that is why we love it. I think I was already wondering, back in 2012 when I first encountered his work, how it applies to narrative and I think it's an even stronger question now that enhances, rather than explains, stories and why I love them.
portiadelriobrown's review against another edition
4.0
I’m giving this book 3.5 stars so I rounded up to 4.
I cannot in good conscience give this book more than 4 stars simply because of how mentally taxing it was for me. Finishing it turned into a question of pride and dignity at the end. Nonetheless, this book does everything it’s supposed to do and it does it very well. Dr. Ramachandran is a brilliant mind and I adore his writing. I think I’ll read some of his other works but not until much later on in life. I need a break.
I cannot in good conscience give this book more than 4 stars simply because of how mentally taxing it was for me. Finishing it turned into a question of pride and dignity at the end. Nonetheless, this book does everything it’s supposed to do and it does it very well. Dr. Ramachandran is a brilliant mind and I adore his writing. I think I’ll read some of his other works but not until much later on in life. I need a break.
sscs's review against another edition
5.0
The book reminded me of some of my college courses on how people tick and revived my interest in the neurological role in same. Easily the non-fiction book that has made me think the most this year.
Read it! Then talk to me about it!
Read it! Then talk to me about it!