I'm only about 200 pages into Mr. Pinker's book, but I was gladly served a reason to distrust most forms of consciousness discourse, due to the facts argued in his work suggest the mind works in ways most people in the humanities willingly discount.

If the computational theory of mind Pinker drives home is measurable, then, well, traditional theory is pointless to me.

But, we shall see how his book holds up.

How the mind works is a very interesting and eye opening book, What I liked about the book was that it talks about our biology, what is inside of us like our genes from our past ancestors and how that affects many generations in the lifestyle and decisions that they make. It also throws out there crazy concepts or that at least seem unordinary in our society such as raping individuals in our genes. What I also liked about the book was that it presented factual evidence on most of the topics discussed in the book. I also liked that it talked about evolution because that is one of my favorite topics to discuss and learn more information about because it astounds me how we can come from the forms that we come from and how we adapted to our environment and what we were exposed to. The thing that I didn't like about the book was that it came out bias in some aspect of the book just off the wording they were using, it seemed one sided at times and I like more when its holistic and you look at all the different aspects and keep your opinions to yourself that others may be sensitive to in a way. I learned a lot from the book such as the mind is so complex it holds within it what your ancestors may have embedded in your brain and what knowledge and information you have obtained through the years. Learn to understand the scientific side of life. Yes I would recommend this book to others because it gave me an array of information in just this 500 page book that I might have never learned in school because our system is censored at time and they don't like to discuss a lot of different challenging topics.

2.5/5, много полезна информация, събрана на едно място. Шапки долу за труда да се събере и синтезира.
Но... много куц писател :) не умее да разказва, но му пиша шест за умението да проучва и синтезира.

Cognitive psychologist Steven Pinker claims in the afterword of this being his favorite book of which he is the most proud. As the title indicates, it is about the mind, and the first chapter summarizes the book’s core idea in a single sentence: “The mind is a system of organs of computation, designed by natural selection to solve the kinds of problems our ancestors faced in their foraging way of life, in particular, understanding and outmaneuvering objects, animals, plants, and other people.” One fallacy that Professor Pinker seeks to debunk is that humans constitute some higher order of evolution. Rather, current iterations of body and mind exist today simply because they previously conferred survival and success to our ancestors based on time and circumstance. More generally, the book covers cognition, pattern recognition and thought processes, visual perception, emotions, relationships (from an evolution / selfish gene perspective), and the purpose (or lack thereof) of art, philosophy, and other “deeper” concepts which on their face do not convey patently recognizable survival advantages. For many (including in STEM) the mind is often taken for granted without appreciating its complexities and elegance. Even by today’s (2024) standards and with AGI on the supposed horizon, the mind remains unparalleled as the pinnacle of engineering whether by deity or natural selection.

'How the Mind Works' is an ambitious book. Pinker addresses an insane medley of topics: if it pertains to the mind in any way whatsoever, it's fair game. This variety of topics discussed is the books greatest strength, but also it primary weakness.

Firstly, the bad: this book isn't clearly connected by an overarching thesis. I suppose everything has to do with 'the mind' - though this is debatable, as there are long stretches where you'll be prone to forget this book is supposed to be about 'how the mind works'. If each of the 8 chapters (some of which span upwards of a 100 pages) had been published as a self-contained book, no one would have been the wiser. In this sense, some cohesion would have been nice. The material is presented in a somewhat haphazard manner.

Now then, onto the good: the material presented is totally awesome. Pinker is a terrific writer, and just about everything covered in 'How the Mind Works' was intensely interesting. And cover a lot he does: you'll read about your brain's insane ability to make sense of visual input; about the importance of 'irrational' emotions (and why they're not so irrational after all); and about the evolutionary underpinning of sexuality, to name a few topics of interest. I didn't agree with everything said, and some of his opinions, presented as fact, are decidedly controversial. But most importantly, all of the topics were interesting, and his conclusions are almost always well supported. 'How the Mind Works' was never boring, and that's high praise for a book of this scope.

Should you read this book? Maybe. It's pretty ambitious, and unless you're fairly stoked about the material, you might be better of finding something more focused and concise. But if you're willing to take the plunge, you're in for a treat - How the Mind Works is an intellectual tour de force.

I started this, listened to 3.5 hours of the audiobook’s total of 26 and simply couldn’t imagine continuing. The first chapter (2.5 hours), which the author calls an “opening brief”, can in simple terms be seen as an introduction. This introduction was not concise; it was rambling and consisted of mundane generalizations. It did not clarify how the book would be organized nor in precise terms what the author wished to show. Nothing enticed me to continue.

To better understand the field of cognitive science I am looking for a book based on solid scientific backing, not one based on speculation. I want at least a modicum of solid proof for what is being claimed, and I found not one smidgeon of that here.

There was an excessive amount of criticism of other scientists’ views while at the same time the author’s own views were not made clear.

I disliked the manner in which the author gave an enormous number of examples which supposedly were meant to prove the generalizations made. Many examples proved nothing. They referred to movie figures, characters in fiction, objects we use in our daily life and further generalizations about human behavior. The list of examples drowned out the statement that was to be proven.

Even in the first introductory chapter there were statements made the validity of which can be debated. We are told that humans today no longer worry about robots / computer programs being made that function better than man. That is not true! In the news recently was a debate about the inequitable use of artificial intelligence programs.

So I finished the unwieldy, long-winded, empty first introductory chapter and moved on to the second. Before quitting the book I wanted to check if perhaps the style of writing altered. It did not.

The narration by Mel Foster started off too fast, but I got used to it. At one point I set the speed down to 75%, and that was too slow! Sentences become distorted. In a book such as this a listener needs time to consider what is being said so they can themselves evaluate what they are being told.

The rambling, chatty writing style, the multitude of generalizations and the lack of both conclusive evidence and scientific backing are not what I am looking for. If I do not want to read a book, this says clearly that I did not like that which I read. I am giving this one star.

I learned so much from this book. Some of the information makes for interesting conversation, like, why we think people are beautiful, how our eyes set us apart from all other animals, and why men have a roving eye for other females. Steven Pinker utilizes the expertise of the world's best scientists in their fields to explain How the Mind Works.

I don't know h0w I ever managed to live fully as a woman before the erudite Dr. Pinker informed me that it is not in my nature to like pornography. I'm so glad he set me straight on that. I guess I'm going to have to wipe my hard drive.

First, the mind is not the brain, but the brain’s actions. Pinker put forward two theories on the origin and evolution of the mind, the computational theory of mind, and the theory of natural selection. The core of the computational theory of mind is that the human mind works in the same way as a computer. It interprets external information the brain receives using different representations, then processes it and finally produces an output. Our mind has at least four major forms of representation, namely visual representation, phonological representation, grammatical representation, and mentalese. The key idea of natural selection theory is that the human mind is the result of genetic evolution. Four critical factors contribute to the evolution of the human mind, which are vision, group living, hands, and hunting.

Second, the four abilities of the mind are vision perception, inference, emotions, and social relations. Through visual perception, we can transform what we see into mental descriptions. Inference is the basis of our understanding and interpretation of the world. Based on classification, inference enables us to analyze information with the help of three tools, logic, arithmetic and probability. Additionally, emotions enable us to seek benefits, to avoid harm, and to ensure gene replication. Finally, due to the existence of social relations, we can demonstrate altruistic behaviors at appropriate times.

When Pinker finally wrote in the book that we don’t live by bread alone, he means that we also have music, art, poetry, and drama. These are not the products of adaptation, but the masterpieces of our minds, and what make our life meaningful. It is nature’s unique design that allows us to compromise on one thing, and excel at another when facing challenges. This demonstrates the greatness of nature, and all of us should show our respect and appreciation for it.

if i could give it -3/5, i would

This book has been made mostly completely obsolete by the field of epigenetics. The type of genetic (over) determinism espoused here was always questionable -- the author tries to explain 90% of human behavior through the narrow lense of the "selfish gene" -- but, epigenetics has shown that environmental factors can cause the body to put certain genetic expressions on hold for generations. The idea of genetic determinism if not flatout wrong, is at the very least deeply flawed. This is too bad because the book starts (Chapters 1 & 2) with an interesting and still-relevant discussion of modular brain functions, before it spins off into fantastic, disproven speculations which to a large extent are only tangentially related to "How the Mind Works". Your average Wikipedia page is better sourced than the last 5 chapters of this book. Not worth your time. Instead read: How Emotions are Made, The Ego Tunnel, or The Epigenetics Revolution

Pinker es quizá uno de los intelectuales más influyentes de nuestro tiempo, y ésta es el tercer libro suyo que leo. Quizá debí empezar por aquí, pues antecede a “The Blank Slate” y “The Better Angels of our Nature”. Por otro lado, estos libros también son respuestas a las polémicas que generó el primero, así que en cierta forma estuvo bien conocerlos de antemano.

El libro trata precisamente de lo que dice el título, cómo funciona la mente, basándose en dos de los paradigmas más relevantes en las ciencias cognitivas actuales: la teoría computacional de la mente y la psicología evolutiva. A la vez erudito, claro y ameno, Pinker nos guía por temas complejísimos mientras nos provee del conocimiento de ramas tan diversas como la neurociencia, la antropología y la filosofía de la mente, aderezando todo con ejemplos divertidos e interesantes del arte, la historia y la cultura pop.

Los primeros cinco capítulos son un “mindblow” monumental. En ellos, Pinker nos hace pensar en las acciones más sencillas que realizamos en la vida cotidiana, como mover los dedos de la mano, y nos obliga a verlos bajo la luz de la ciencia, como los hechos maravillosos y extraordinarios que son en realidad. Cómo procesamos la información, clasificamos conceptos, ponemos límites a nuestras definiciones, extraemos conclusiones nuevas a partir de ciertos conocimientos dados. Pinker aborda estos temas de tal forma que se siente como un viaje de autodescubrimiento, que nos hace apreciar e impresionarnos de nuestras propias capacidades mentales y nos impulsa e ejercitar el pensamiento crítico. Un capítulo enteramente dedicado a la percepción visual, algo que damos tan por sentado, es uno de los más fascinantes.

Otro más explica con una gran claridad los procesos de selección natural que dieron origen a la diversidad de la vida en la tierra y, también, a nuestra mente. Los últimos tres están dedicados a temas delicados: los sentimientos, las relaciones humanas, la familia, la amistad, las diferencias entre los sexos, la creación artística, las creencias religiosas y el impulso que nos lleva a hacernos las más profundas y complicadas preguntas filosóficas.

El libro abarca tanto y cada párrafo contiene tanta información y reflexiones, que es difícil hacer un resumen que le haga justicia. Además, es uno que cabría leer muchas veces, porque cada cosa te impresiona tanto que corres el riesgo de olvidar la anterior que te impresionó. Podría mencionar, de botepronto, la explicación que nos hace de cómo en la apreciación del arte no entra sólo la psicología de la estética, sino la psicología del estatus, que da cuenta de las modas artísticas cambiantes y de cómo el medio está lleno de posers.

O su defensa de la filosofía como una actividad que permite enmarcar los problemas más complejos, ya sea para resolverlos en parte, darlos a la ciencia para que los resuelva, o de plano declararlos irresolubles. O su refutación de múltiples mitos difundidos por la psicología pop, el psicoanálisis freudiano o la antropología romántica. O su aclaración de cómo los descubrimientos científicos en las diferencias psicológicas entre los sexos no debe asustar a feministas ni envalentonar antifeministas.

Sobre esto último, hay algo que me puso a pensar. En una parte, hablando de las diferencias entre sexos, mencionó la ausencia de un mercado de pornografía para mujeres (a diferencia de la multimillonaria industria del porno para hombres) como muestra de las diferencias psicológicas innatas entre los sexos. Pero Pinker escribía en la década de los 90, antes del boom del porno por Internet. Ahora sabemos que casi la mitad del público pajero son mujeres. Es decir, algo se creía natural e innato porque todos los casos observables así lo indicaban. De pronto se dio una situación social inédita gracias a un avance tecnológico que permitía el acceso inmediato, privado y anónimo a ciertos contenidos.

Pues te deja pensando, ¿qué tantas cosas estaremos considerando naturales e innatas, que sólo estén esperando situaciones sociales inéditas para demostrarnos lo contrario?