Customer Reviews

From Brains to Consciousness? Essays on the New Sciences of the Mind

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

 

 

This book is more related with question than answer. The authors focus on the success and the pit falls of the growing science of consciousness in a very elegant and explicit way. As neuroscientists, aware of the technological advance, they establish what the technology can do to uncover consciousness and what it can't do at the present time. In addition, they also comments on what is still needed in order to obtain more information about consciousness in live human beings. But most of all, they argue about the necessity of clarifying the definition of consciousness in order to lead to new discoveries.

The book could be divided in three parts. The first few chapters deal with basic concepts of the central nervous system from what a neuron is? to neurotransmitters, to the hypothesis of long-term potentiation as evidence of the physical existence of memory. In the middle, there are two excellent chapters on the problem with the diagnosis of dementia (Alzheimer's disease and squizophrenia) and how careful we have to be to establish generalization such as that when you get old you will be nuts, or is you find any of these symptoms your dealing with a squizophrenic. Then, the rest of the book is focus on consciousness, presented in a multidisciplinary approach. From artificial intelligent to philosophy.

Written for a general audience, From Brains to Consciousness is and excellent source to complement a text book on basic neuroscience in a way to arouse the curiosity and to debate fundamental things about being human with the students, in addition to break with the standard of learning facts.

While every section of science studies brain, mind, culture and psychopathology on its own grounds, this collection of essays shows how all disciplines together can shed light on each other's field of interest and solve some tough question. When I purchased this book I was looking for a reflection of mr. Rose's ideology of science, which it turned out not to be. Nonetheless, it is very relevant and quite interesting!
(I later found more of mr. Rose's thoughts in a book he edited with a Hillary Rose - his wife? - called "Alas Poor Darwin". It shows the untenability of Evolutionary Psychology. His own article in that collection is by far the best of all. Also, his "Not in Our Genes" with Richard Lewontin is supposed to be a reflection of his philosophy of science.)

This is a grat book because it is multidiciplinary, but maybe content wise, it is not very original-nor focused in consciousness. There are papers dealing with squitzofrenia and ageing. Greenfield contribution presents her neuronal assemblie theory. Rose writes a great introduction to consciousness studies, and it alone pays for the entrance ticket. It is always interesting to read about Aleksanders work on artificial consciousness, and Penrose on Quantum Consciousness. The collection as a whole covers many topics, and it is a valuable contribution to consciousness studies. It is also not at all technical, so it can serve as an introductory work of the field. Again, originality and content do will not live to many expectations, but I certialy recomend the book.

Steven Rose compiled an uneven collection of papers. Some of his allusions to Soma seem misplaced when contrasted with Crow's biological psychiatry (article on Schizophrenia). Another article claims that schizophrenia is not an identifiable medical condition. Schizophrenia is a useful label for a complex constellation of symptoms. They share at least one characteristic: disordered thinking. I am reminded of Oliver Sacks' book, Migraine. When originally written, Sacks dispaired that a single, unified cause would be discovered. In a revision ten years later, Sacks discussed the discovery of a single cause, the nucleus trigeminalis, in the brain stem. Some of the articles are out of place; for example, discussion of computers and artificial intelligence. Several of the articles are excellent but do not offset the more peculiar articles.