Scan barcode
rbogue's review against another edition
Whom should we care about? Whom should we hold accountable, and whom should we defend? The answer lies at the heart of The Mind Club: Who Thinks, What Feels, and Why It Matters. If you’re concerned about how people manipulate others towards genocide, or you’re curious about why we hold people accountable – or not – the answer lies in our perception of their experience and in our perceptions of their agency.
Read more
Read more
branch_c's review against another edition
2.0
Well, I could be wrong, but I suspect this book is primarily the work of Kurt Gray, rather than Daniel Wegner. Having read a couple of books by Wegner, as well as having taken one of his undergraduate courses back in the 80s, it just seems that the voice and tone here is different. And nothing against Gray, but I don't think this book quite measures up to Wegner's work.
The subject matter is fascinating, and well worth the book treatment. But Gray seems to be trying too hard here to be a comedian, and his one liners are not as funny to me as he seems to think they should be. As popular science goes, this book is much more "pop" than science, using cutesy phrasing, vaguely relevant illustrations, and transparent hooks to try to hold the interest of readers with short attention spans.
As for the content, well, I give Gray credit for coming up with thoughtful ideas and exploring them. But I see little evidence for his key assertion, that "There are two kinds of perceived minds, each with its own type of morality - thinking doers and vulnerable feelers". (p. 16). I mean, I suppose that might be true, and some of the examples produced in support of it are not too contrived, but it's a bit of a stretch to try to draw any explanatory conclusions from this.
In fact, there seems to be a pattern here: a study is cited, and then the next sentence is a speculative conclusion based on the results of the study, but the study results don't directly imply the conclusion. Sure, it's a possible hypothesis in many cases, but there are other possible explanations that aren't considered. For example, in making the argument that people may be inherent dualists, the author discusses a study involving babies who were shown videos in which a person seemed to teleport, and concludes with "They weren't surprised at all by a teleporting person [citation], perhaps because they expect things with minds to (at least occasionally) disobey the laws of matter [no citation]." (p. 236) Interesting idea,and people may in fact be instinctively dualist, but it's a stretch to conclude the second statement from the first.
It's also interesting and maybe a bit strange that while further elaborating on dualism, the author feels it necessary to state that "With funding from the John Templeton Foundation, our lab has experimentally tested conservation of mind across death..." The mention of Templeton, which is in the business of funding attempts to reconcile science and religion, should be a red flag for anyone interested in science as an unbiased endeavor.
So, although I was interested in the subject matter and had high expectations for this book, it unfortunately came across as rather shallower and overly speculative than I'd hoped for, and was ultimately somewhat disappointing.
The subject matter is fascinating, and well worth the book treatment. But Gray seems to be trying too hard here to be a comedian, and his one liners are not as funny to me as he seems to think they should be. As popular science goes, this book is much more "pop" than science, using cutesy phrasing, vaguely relevant illustrations, and transparent hooks to try to hold the interest of readers with short attention spans.
As for the content, well, I give Gray credit for coming up with thoughtful ideas and exploring them. But I see little evidence for his key assertion, that "There are two kinds of perceived minds, each with its own type of morality - thinking doers and vulnerable feelers". (p. 16). I mean, I suppose that might be true, and some of the examples produced in support of it are not too contrived, but it's a bit of a stretch to try to draw any explanatory conclusions from this.
In fact, there seems to be a pattern here: a study is cited, and then the next sentence is a speculative conclusion based on the results of the study, but the study results don't directly imply the conclusion. Sure, it's a possible hypothesis in many cases, but there are other possible explanations that aren't considered. For example, in making the argument that people may be inherent dualists, the author discusses a study involving babies who were shown videos in which a person seemed to teleport, and concludes with "They weren't surprised at all by a teleporting person [citation], perhaps because they expect things with minds to (at least occasionally) disobey the laws of matter [no citation]." (p. 236) Interesting idea,and people may in fact be instinctively dualist, but it's a stretch to conclude the second statement from the first.
It's also interesting and maybe a bit strange that while further elaborating on dualism, the author feels it necessary to state that "With funding from the John Templeton Foundation, our lab has experimentally tested conservation of mind across death..." The mention of Templeton, which is in the business of funding attempts to reconcile science and religion, should be a red flag for anyone interested in science as an unbiased endeavor.
So, although I was interested in the subject matter and had high expectations for this book, it unfortunately came across as rather shallower and overly speculative than I'd hoped for, and was ultimately somewhat disappointing.
wordsmithreads's review against another edition
4.0
I hovered between a 3 and a 4 for this book.
Things that make it a 3:
- It's a little insensitive at some points (not very politically correct) but I know that isn't the reason the book was written.
- The chapters often meander a little too far off the main topic of the chapter (but always bring it back home by the end of it.)
- There was a little too much "This chapter will be about XYZ" -- show me, don't tell me. But I know that showing is more in novels, and this was nonfiction.
Things that ultimately bumped it to a 4:
- The humor in it. This reminded me a lot of books by [a:Mary Roach|7956|Mary Roach|https://images.gr-assets.com/authors/1463591979p2/7956.jpg], especially the footnotes. Weirdly, I also felt like I was reading a Lemony Snicket novel, the way the author(s) speak to the reader.
- I learned a bunch of fun facts. I have shared some of these fun facts with my family members and have become halfway insufferable because of it.
Passages, to myself for future reference:
Page 67: transactive memory; dividing who remembers what among spouses
Page 95: what "patiency" means beyond medicine
Page 96: The Lemony Snicket-y line -- "Planning for retirement may be difficult, but doing so while standing in a pile of razor blades is impossible."
Page 116: "So next time your selflessness is praised in front of others, beware: making sacrifices for others makes it easier for them to sacrifice you."
Page 248: "We rarely think, 'I want to approach this woman and ask for her number, but what about the inevitable annihilation of my consciousness?'
Page 263: Kierkegaard's quote: "Life is not a problem to be solved, but a reality to be experienced"
Page 271: Dante's Inferno's lowest level is for those who betrayed family, friends, and their lords
Page 306: Free will is an illusion
Things that make it a 3:
- It's a little insensitive at some points (not very politically correct) but I know that isn't the reason the book was written.
- The chapters often meander a little too far off the main topic of the chapter (but always bring it back home by the end of it.)
- There was a little too much "This chapter will be about XYZ" -- show me, don't tell me. But I know that showing is more in novels, and this was nonfiction.
Things that ultimately bumped it to a 4:
- The humor in it. This reminded me a lot of books by [a:Mary Roach|7956|Mary Roach|https://images.gr-assets.com/authors/1463591979p2/7956.jpg], especially the footnotes. Weirdly, I also felt like I was reading a Lemony Snicket novel, the way the author(s) speak to the reader.
- I learned a bunch of fun facts. I have shared some of these fun facts with my family members and have become halfway insufferable because of it.
Passages, to myself for future reference:
Spoiler
Page 67: transactive memory; dividing who remembers what among spouses
Page 95: what "patiency" means beyond medicine
Page 96: The Lemony Snicket-y line -- "Planning for retirement may be difficult, but doing so while standing in a pile of razor blades is impossible."
Page 116: "So next time your selflessness is praised in front of others, beware: making sacrifices for others makes it easier for them to sacrifice you."
Page 248: "We rarely think, 'I want to approach this woman and ask for her number, but what about the inevitable annihilation of my consciousness?'
Page 263: Kierkegaard's quote: "Life is not a problem to be solved, but a reality to be experienced"
Page 271: Dante's Inferno's lowest level is for those who betrayed family, friends, and their lords
Page 306: Free will is an illusion
bootman's review against another edition
5.0
3rd read:
I’ve had morality on the mind a lot lately, so I decided to come back to one of my favorite books. This was my third time reading this book, and I still love it just as much. This book isn’t just about morality, either. As the title suggests, it’s about how we perceive minds. Wegner and Gray do such a great job explaining how we assign minds to people in different states as well as the minds we give to animals and machines. The book blends psychology, philosophy, neuroscience and more, and it’s also easy to comprehend for just about anyone who reads it.
I always come back to this book because it helps me feel less insane. I see morality everywhere because it’s what leads to people making decisions, standing up for their beliefs, and wanting to attack or punish others. When I read this book, I better understand what’s going on in the world, and it’s fantastic. So, if you haven’t read this book and want a better idea of what the hell is going on in this world and why people act the way they do, I highly recommend you check this book out.
2nd read:
This was my second time reading this book because it’s such a fantastic book, and I wanted to revisit it before my podcast interview with Kurt Gray. The mind is such an interesting thing, and this is one of the only books I’ve read that dives into some moral philosophy and research around how mind perception affects how we treat others and interact with the world. Throughout the book, there are great thought experiments and questions that will keep you engaged. By the time I finished it, I had to ask Kurt when his next book is coming because this one is so good.
I’ve had morality on the mind a lot lately, so I decided to come back to one of my favorite books. This was my third time reading this book, and I still love it just as much. This book isn’t just about morality, either. As the title suggests, it’s about how we perceive minds. Wegner and Gray do such a great job explaining how we assign minds to people in different states as well as the minds we give to animals and machines. The book blends psychology, philosophy, neuroscience and more, and it’s also easy to comprehend for just about anyone who reads it.
I always come back to this book because it helps me feel less insane. I see morality everywhere because it’s what leads to people making decisions, standing up for their beliefs, and wanting to attack or punish others. When I read this book, I better understand what’s going on in the world, and it’s fantastic. So, if you haven’t read this book and want a better idea of what the hell is going on in this world and why people act the way they do, I highly recommend you check this book out.
2nd read:
This was my second time reading this book because it’s such a fantastic book, and I wanted to revisit it before my podcast interview with Kurt Gray. The mind is such an interesting thing, and this is one of the only books I’ve read that dives into some moral philosophy and research around how mind perception affects how we treat others and interact with the world. Throughout the book, there are great thought experiments and questions that will keep you engaged. By the time I finished it, I had to ask Kurt when his next book is coming because this one is so good.
reasonpassion's review against another edition
5.0
Filled with great research and wit, this is a book you read when you want your intuitive thoughts challenged and sense of self questioned. A careful look at what “mind” is, how we use the concept and it’s implications for how we live our lives. The struggle with what you learn here is worth every moment.
More...