How the Mind Works (Penguin Press Science)

"Steven Pinker is the author of the modular mind theory which is refuted by his colleagues. Further analogies with computer architecture are similarly presented here with his inference of parallel processing. Other authors stress that the brain's neural networks are more akin to internetworking which does have implications for parallel processing but so what? We know all of this already. Unconvincing on the relationship between mind and brain. For instance, how is will (thought direction) and conscience explained? Thus far, no one has succesfully explained the distinction and scientifically is very unlikely to. This leaves unlimited scope for ongoing speculation, of course. The self is much more than neural networking, which is the platform of the human mind and not the mind itself. The reductionist stance to engineering concepts for the mind is too simple by half. The sheer complexity of the brain and nervous system is ever more impressive than superficial explanation."
~ Written on 2008-01-13

"Unravelling the mechanisms of human thinking and emotions is garnering increased attention from dedicated scientists and thinkers. Old attitudes and preconceptions are being swept away by newer ideas based on firm research. Steven Pinker has assembled these results to provide an outstanding synopsis of cognitive studies. He refers to the old views of the mind's working as "mysteries." Pinker, as a good scientist, applauds the updating of mental "mysteries" to "problems" capable of resolution. He makes no claim to the problems all being solved, or, in a few instances, even being identified. His approach, however, is a refreshing and innovative one, aimed at anyone wishing to gain an understanding of what it means to be human. As might be expected from the man who wrote The Language Instinct, he's a master of illustrative example and with many anecdotes for teaching the reader.

Pinker uses evolutionary roots as the foundation for his presentation. Like it or not, our genes carry a large part of our mental processes. The mind is not a "blank slate," but is born with vast supply of historical information on which to build as it matures. The "cultural environment" so dear to some commentators makes only a small contribution to who we become as adults. Even a child's peer groups influence its development more than does parental input, and by a huge margin. This situation arises because the mind is an algorithmic processor. It is essentially independent of an individual's environment, with a built-in learning capability to select from the wide spectrum of inputs. To Pinker, this essentially unconstrained process is part of the evolutionary path. Children's independence reflects the need of natural selection to sort among "what is" to arrive at what "will be" in the future. There are certainly no guarantees of how development will proceed over generations.

The computational image is based on "problem-solving." When to take a step, avoid predators, seek a mate, find food. Clearly, as Pinker states, computational mind processes are as universal as brains. Therefore, in Pinker's view, each brain develops modules for dealing with these issues. Like any powerful computer, he stresses, the mind depends on parallel processing for flexibility. How else, for example, could the brain control breathing while also thinking about a Mozart string trio? As humans evolved, they either added new problem-solving modules, or improved on the inherited ones. This is an algorithmic process - adding small instructions over time as adaptations to changing conditions. It is clearly a universal evolutionary process that has achieved enormous expression in the human species. Each acquired "tactic" could be passed down through generations, with each successful transmission building on an inherited base.

"The mind is not the brain, but what the brain does," is the key statement of the book. Pinker supports this image with numerous examples of mind/brain functions. Why our brain "sees" a three-dimensional image in a stereographic display when we know the photographs are two dimensional is but one of many instances he cites. The various factors he proposes must not be considered as independent entities, he stresses. The algorithmic processes form a whole, but not one based neither on conflicting elements nor particularly complementary ones. Weightings of importance take place continually, but even the expression of an idea is not a mental "victory" for that particular idea. The human mind's greatest attribute is its flexibility.

As with any of the recent works on cognition, Pinker's analysis isn't the final word. Given the complexity of the mind, that is clearly an impossible goal. Yet Pinker has broached many new concepts in this book. All deserve further careful study. Pinker avoids dogmatism with his elegant treatment. This book is required in furthering your own thinking about our place in nature and deserves respect and attention. He welcomes serious studies in the subject, even if the work appears to refute his ideas. But he insists that the refutation must rely on solid science and not traditional dogmas. [stephen a. haines - Ottawa, Canada]"
~ Written on 2005-10-17

"This is a book (also available in audio-book) which can best be described with an analogy:

It is like a book titled "How a clock works". There are many details about gears, and the history of gears, and the idea behind the gear. There are some witty remarks and examination of the history of the STUDY of gears. There are a few off-hand remarks about springs and their uses in other devices. And there is a thoroughly dull discussion of the history of the study of the analysis of the evolution of the possible ideas about time and time-keeping, in the 4th person, removed twice.

But it never tells you anything about how a clock works..."
~ Written on 2005-04-22

"Steven Pinker manages to entertain tremendously and keep our brain cells working at the same time. His ideas are good, but in my opinion he uses circulair reasoning to prove his point that our brain is the way it is because of evolution.

For example, he explains that we cannot ignore the evolution process in which the brain has evolved from apes; in his own words: "The allergy to evolution () has been () a barrier to understanding. () Evolutionary thinking is indispensible."

Later, he 'proves' that evolution must have taken place in these words, "Evolution is a conservative process, to be sure, but it can't be all THAT conservative or we would all be pond scum".
To me, this sounds as, "Everybody in this hospital is a total paralytic, but since they are all well-fed they can't be THAT paralysed or they would all be skeletons."
You can't ignore the fact that there might be another factor why they are alive, in this case the nurses that care for them.

It seems that Pinker is reasoning that since we do not have God's telephone number, He can't exist and we must have arrived on this planet by evolution. From that starting point, he has written this book on how our brain funcions.

Now, without starting a discussion whether there is a God or not, we cannot ignore that evolution is still a THEORY, not a proven fact. To me Pinker's new theory, nice and witty as it may be, is based on another theory which makes it a lot more implausible.
Still, I'd recommend this book to all who are interested in the human brain."
~ Written on 2003-05-29

"Recommended wholeheartedly by my scientific colleague, i was anticipating something exciting and stimulating. But what an overrated bore! Topics like this really need to be presented much more visually and contains too much continuous text that completely fails to hold interest. Such information is much more colourfully and succinctly explained in standard Neurophysiological text books. Forget it!"
~ Written on 2003-04-20