Customer Reviews

An Argument for Mind

5 star:		(3)
4 star:		(0)
3 star:		(2)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

Harvard developmental psychologist Jerome Kagan mixes his autobiographical memoirs with a history of the last 50 years of psychology. He has been in the middle of the nature/nurture debate since the behaviorists faded out, specializing in the temperament of the newborn. Kagan was and still is involved in what has been a very public controversy with attachment theorists. He has contributed significantly to the realization that genetic influences cannot be denied, but can be significantly altered by environment.

He had significant controversy with Judith Rich Harris in the late 90's as a result of her popular book, "The Nurture Assumption." Despite their publicized clashes in written and video format, they both emphasized genetic influence and criticized attachment theory - but Harris minimized (and still does) the importance of family, replacing it with peer group influences. Kagan continues to defend the influence of the family in forming adult personality.

He is not much for evolutionary psychology and its reliance on game theory, natural selection, and sexual selection - as they relate to theory of personality. Nor does he believe EP is helpful in explaining our seemingly innate attraction to religion - despite recent books relating EP to religion by Atran, Boyer, and Dennett. He believes people are motivated more by personal moral standards, and is disappointed by what he interprets as our recent cultural and moral decline. He further suggests that society can't expect much help from science in ethical matters.

To Kagan, the brain and the mind are not equivalent and he provides stunning evidence for the difference between physical states and psychological states. He believes that the opposing camps studying the mind/brain will eventually split psychology into two factions - the reductionist, neurobiological faction and the other more sociocultural.

The best part of this very personal book is his research on infant temperament as it relates to adult personality. Written with penetrating clarity for the layman, "An Argument For Mind" is a valuable resource for anyone interested in developmental psychology and neuroscience.

Kagan writes as a psychologist. And he analyzes here the history of Psychology and the various concepts of mind arising out of the historical schools in the stages of Psychology as a formal discipline.

But he is very conversant with the current studies from other fields that have probed and clarified this question of thinking, self-identity and the idea of Mind, or Soul as an entity or locus of personal consciousness and self-identity. He references neurology and related areas of investigation as he reports on experiments and investigations he himself conducted over a long period.

Kagan reviews the history of concepts of mind in Psychology, then critiques the previous schools of thought in light of recent experiments, including many of his own conducted over the past decades. He references experiments that followed individuals in many populations in different continents from birth to adulthood.

His conclusion establishes that there are universal categories of mind and patterns of learning across human populations and social or family situations. These seem to be inherent in the structure of the human mind and nervous system.

He shows how early theories of psychology made up their categories and conclusions from deductions from assumptions rather than by actual observation and generalization from evidence. He indicates how more recent approaches in Psychology have moved more in line with actual empirical investigation, in the Scientific Method, to observe and summarize, then generalize.

Kagan concludes from the evidence of these many practical experiments and observations that there is a Mind in humans that cannot be accounted for by conditioning and behavioural training or childhood experience. He observes that there are universal moral and social values that appear to relate to this universal common Mind among all human cultures and populations.

This is fascinating reading, whether you are focused on Psychology or not. This will make you think about who we are, who you are. You will think about Thinking, your mind will engage the concept of Mind! Have fun, enjoy the exploration as I did.

This book seems like Professor Kagan's "warm-up" for his book "The Three Cultures" released this year. Where "Three Cultures" is lucid, exciting and more of an "integral" read, "Argument for Mind" is tedious and seems more like Professor Kagan working out some confusion. He walks us through multiple studies of development going to pains (and causing pain) to describe mind/brain relations only to discard those relations in his conclusions. I generally like Kagan's work but don't recommend this one. My sense is he was really trying to work out some of the thinking that is nicely presented in "The Three Cultures" so I'd go straight to that one if I were a reader looking for a good book.

It would have been more appropriate if Mr Kagan would have called his book "A collection of reflections". If you expect a meaningfull contribution to the "Theory of Mind" you will probably be disappointed.

Found his book 'Handbook of Child Psychology' rich with fascinating information. Chapter on Human Morality asks then answers some fantastic questions. This book is even more rewarding! Dr. Kagan has written, spoke on and taught many topics in psychology, and in this book he reviews some perspectives or approaches in the field, as well as some predictions and recommendations for the future. Well worth reading for the new psychology student or current practitioner.

As a fellow psychologist, I can't help but think that my esteemed (properly so) colleague Jerry Fodor is showing in this book how the emperor (psychology) is going about without any clothes. He is trying to place "mind" more squarely into psychologists' minds; and that's certainly to the good. But what is so obvious through these pages is how psychologists are so lacking in any kind of philosophical sophistication. Sure, psychology is to be a science; it is to turn its back on this most ancient and fuzzy of intellectual endeavors. But my lord, philosophers - - and there have been some who are pretty bright - - have been addressing the issues of mind and consciousness for centuries! Do we have to ignore them? Do we have to begin at square one with statements like "there are four kinds of consciousness" after philosophers have been involved in studying consciousness and mind, thoroughly, some through their lifetimes? Have you heard of Husserl's phenomenological reduction? If there are four kinds of consciousness in your reckoning of today (and that's sure to change tomorrow), does this include your reckoning itself? - - that's also in your consciousness, is it not? After all, all your thoughts, ideas, conclusions, perceptions, "objects" are in your consciousness, right? - - or you wouldn't be conscious of them, wouldn't in any way "have" them. So what are we to make of this fact? Does it bring us into solipsism? Guess what - - philosophers have been addressing this issue for years. They have been as concerned as we about such an unacceptable conclusion.

No use in taking refuge here in facts/measurement/research/science. No use in trying to "objectify" consciousness and mind so that we can study them dispassionately. Our objectification itself is a mental act, and whatever its products - - facts, measurements, etc. - - are in our consciousness as well. Furthermore, anything you say or try to advance on us may or may not take form in our minds in just the same way you are intending.

Isn't it time we stopped being naive and started considering the inescapability of mind? And isn't it time for psychologists to step out of their willful ignorance and begin to do a little catching up on what their sister (yes, nonscientific) disciplines have done? We could start with Kant's Copernican revolution.

So we can stop embarrassing ourselves.