Scan barcode
danielgwood's review
3.0
Presents some fascinating ideas - how quantum theory and the mind may be related is nothing short of fascinating - and the author has achieved great things with OCD patients. It's also interesting to see neuroscience and neuroplasticity related to wider philosophical questions, and Buddhism.
Despite these insights though, I found it a bit repetitive. As brilliant as the author's groundbreaking work with OCD patients was, this was brought up on what felt like every other page throughout the entire book, so by the end I was losing interest.
Despite these insights though, I found it a bit repetitive. As brilliant as the author's groundbreaking work with OCD patients was, this was brought up on what felt like every other page throughout the entire book, so by the end I was losing interest.
davidr's review
5.0
This is an excellent book. I learned how people with severe conditions can sometimes overcome the debilitating effects of stroke, OCD, and so on.
Toward the end of the book, the author describes how quantum mechanics may be a key component to volition and free will. But, I am not completely convinced of the connection with quantum mechanics. I understand how the act of observation of an atom can resolve its (previously probabilistic) state. And the analogy between "observation" and "attention" is striking. But doesn't this just beg the question, what is the mechanism for the mind/brain to show attention to something?
Toward the end of the book, the author describes how quantum mechanics may be a key component to volition and free will. But, I am not completely convinced of the connection with quantum mechanics. I understand how the act of observation of an atom can resolve its (previously probabilistic) state. And the analogy between "observation" and "attention" is striking. But doesn't this just beg the question, what is the mechanism for the mind/brain to show attention to something?
carolined314's review
4.0
This is a book about plasticity in the brain. Schwartz treated OCD patients in a way that was entirely novel at the time and now has become the standard. Although most of his examples are about OCD, the neuroscience base that he writes about is applicable across many disorders or poorly organized orders. For instance, in one section he talks about getting something stuck in your mind; the example is of someone needing to wash her hands until they bled, but his solutions were equally useful if you have an earworm song that won't quit resonating.
Like a lot of popsci, your mileage will vary. You may need to skip chapters, or read up on terms that aren't fully explained, based on your neuroscience background. I found the tale of how some patients demonstrated neural plasticity through behavioral changes that led to increased happiness quite compelling.
Like a lot of popsci, your mileage will vary. You may need to skip chapters, or read up on terms that aren't fully explained, based on your neuroscience background. I found the tale of how some patients demonstrated neural plasticity through behavioral changes that led to increased happiness quite compelling.
rebus's review against another edition
1.0
Some good stuff here, but most of this seems like absolute drivel and I'm not sure all the meditation movements have proven that notion of mine wrong.
lizshayne's review against another edition
3.0
This one gets a solid meh.
The descriptions of psychology are interesting and the narrative he creates out of our intellectual movement from a kind of behavioralist rigid idea of the brain to our contemporary understanding both of neuroplasticity and the mind are compelling.
At the same time, I found the idea of using quantum physics to be productive, though not in the way Schwartz intended. He makes a good argument for a non-deterministic view of the brain (contrary to, say, Daniel Dennett) based on the simple nondeterministic view of the universe. But then he shifts into a kind of "dualism post the discovery of Buddhism in the West" that never properly explains, for example, WHY the idea of the mind as emergent is impossible. His insistence on the mind as such and on keeping the Cartesian boundaries he claims to knock down was just unsatisfying, more so because the idea of quantum indeterminacy as the answer to free Will was actually really cool.
Long story short, he mistakes the ideology with which he makes sense of the phenomenological world as an accurate explanation for those experiences, but fails to provide enough evidence for this reader, at least, to believe that said ideology is a response to the data rather than to the author's own theology. The individual claims are fascinating right up to the end, but the overall thesis needs work.
The descriptions of psychology are interesting and the narrative he creates out of our intellectual movement from a kind of behavioralist rigid idea of the brain to our contemporary understanding both of neuroplasticity and the mind are compelling.
At the same time, I found the idea of using quantum physics to be productive, though not in the way Schwartz intended. He makes a good argument for a non-deterministic view of the brain (contrary to, say, Daniel Dennett) based on the simple nondeterministic view of the universe. But then he shifts into a kind of "dualism post the discovery of Buddhism in the West" that never properly explains, for example, WHY the idea of the mind as emergent is impossible. His insistence on the mind as such and on keeping the Cartesian boundaries he claims to knock down was just unsatisfying, more so because the idea of quantum indeterminacy as the answer to free Will was actually really cool.
Long story short, he mistakes the ideology with which he makes sense of the phenomenological world as an accurate explanation for those experiences, but fails to provide enough evidence for this reader, at least, to believe that said ideology is a response to the data rather than to the author's own theology. The individual claims are fascinating right up to the end, but the overall thesis needs work.
donifaber's review against another edition
5.0
This is an important book. I went into it thinking that he probably had a misperception of quantum mechanics, and came out of it convinced that he knows exactly what he's talking about. Overturning decades of materialistic determinism, this book describes how we can shape our brains through our selective attention.
theangrylawngnome's review against another edition
3.0
Take one good, or even very good book. Stick it in a blender with an awful one and set to puree.
Well, okay, I'm speaking metaphorically here, so don't do that. But that at least gives an idea of what I thought of this one. The sections of the book related to the author's work with OCD sufferers, his descriptions of similar work on those with Tourette's Syndrome and major depression and his basic narrative of discoveries related to the brain and what has come to be believed related to its flexibility were all superb. The man knows his stuff, knows lots of people who know their stuff and knows how to communicate it all to a general audience, though I must admit I he did lose me for a time in his section on Quantum Mechanics.
Unfortunately, that ain't all there is here. And that other stuff is a train wreck, mostl flowing from what I can only call a mission of some sort to disprove Materialism, both scientific and philosophical. First, makes no bones about the fact that what he has learned from Swami Dorito Guacamolejam (or whoever) is at least part of the reason behind this, revealing a rather unfortunate bias. Second, there's even a villain of the piece: Behaviorism. Not that I'm any fan of it, but, eh, he ain't Galileo and they ain't the Inquisition, so his over the top stuff here is just silly. And as best I can tell, his conclusions don't follow from his facts: in other words, Materialism is not disproven. Perhaps in need of modification, but not disproven.
I was also more than a tad irritated at his unwillingness to give a straightforward definition of the term "Mind." It is in the title, after all. But while there are lengthy discussions of brain physiology and function, the Mind seems to pop in and out of the book, usually only after some experiment or other is described that appears to debunk the commonly held materialist theory of XYZ. He also switches to the term "Will" for a while, which is either the same as the mind, a part of the mind or something else that falls outside materialist theory and has little or nothing to do with the mind (or brain), it really isn't clear.
Well, okay, I'm speaking metaphorically here, so don't do that. But that at least gives an idea of what I thought of this one. The sections of the book related to the author's work with OCD sufferers, his descriptions of similar work on those with Tourette's Syndrome and major depression and his basic narrative of discoveries related to the brain and what has come to be believed related to its flexibility were all superb. The man knows his stuff, knows lots of people who know their stuff and knows how to communicate it all to a general audience, though I must admit I he did lose me for a time in his section on Quantum Mechanics.
Unfortunately, that ain't all there is here. And that other stuff is a train wreck, mostl flowing from what I can only call a mission of some sort to disprove Materialism, both scientific and philosophical. First, makes no bones about the fact that what he has learned from Swami Dorito Guacamolejam (or whoever) is at least part of the reason behind this, revealing a rather unfortunate bias. Second, there's even a villain of the piece: Behaviorism. Not that I'm any fan of it, but, eh, he ain't Galileo and they ain't the Inquisition, so his over the top stuff here is just silly. And as best I can tell, his conclusions don't follow from his facts: in other words, Materialism is not disproven. Perhaps in need of modification, but not disproven.
I was also more than a tad irritated at his unwillingness to give a straightforward definition of the term "Mind." It is in the title, after all. But while there are lengthy discussions of brain physiology and function, the Mind seems to pop in and out of the book, usually only after some experiment or other is described that appears to debunk the commonly held materialist theory of XYZ. He also switches to the term "Will" for a while, which is either the same as the mind, a part of the mind or something else that falls outside materialist theory and has little or nothing to do with the mind (or brain), it really isn't clear.
More...