The Essential Difference: The Truth About The Male And Female Brain [Hardcover]

Simon Baron-Cohen (Author)

Book Description

Release date: July 1, 2003

We all appreciate that there are differences in the typical psychology of men and women. Yet underlying these subtle differences, Simon Baron-Cohen believes, there is one essential difference, and it affects everything we do: Men have a tendency to analyze and construct systems while women are inclined to empathize. With fresh evidence for these claims, Baron-Cohen explores how these sex differences arise more from biological than cultural causes and shows us how each brain type contributes in various ways to what we think of as "intelligence." Emphasizing that not all men have the typically "male" brain, which he calls Type "S," and not all women have the typically female brain (Type "E"), Baron-Cohen explores the cutting-edge research that illuminates our individual differences and explains why a truly "balanced" brain is so rare. Filled with surprising and illuminating case studies, many from Baron-Cohen's own clinical practice, The Essential Difference moves beyond the stereotypes to elucidate over twenty years of groundbreaking research. From gossip to aggression, Baron-Cohen dissects each brain type and even presents a new theory that autism (as well as its close relative, Asperger's syndrome) can be understood as an extreme form of the male brain. Smart and engaging, this is the thinking person's guide to gender difference, a book that promises to change the conversation about-and between-men and women.

Editorial Reviews

From Publishers Weekly

Should the title fail to express Baron-Cohen's certainty about gender differences, the Cambridge Univ. professor of psychology and psychiatry lays out his controversial thesis on page one: "The female brain is predominantly hard-wired for empathy. The male brain is predominantly hard-wired for understanding and building systems." Defending this bold view is a tough but engaging battle, one that's alleviated by Baron-Cohen's disclaimer that his conclusions refer to statistical majorities rather than "all men" and "all women," but exacerbated by his habit of simultaneously skirting and employing gender stereotypes. His copious evidence ranges from the anecdotal to the anthropological, and from the neurological to the case study (the author and his research team conducted many of these studies). Not all his support fully convinces: e.g., the music-classifying habits of novelist Nick Hornby's High Fidelity protagonist isn't confirmation of the male brain's predisposition to systems-building. After acknowledging cultural and social influences on gender differences, Baron-Cohen "surfs the brain" (and offers evidence from a number of studies, both human and animal) to establish a biological link. But if male rats navigate their way through mazes more easily than female rats, does that mean men are better at directions than women? His speculations on how binary brain types have evolved over the eons, which have the male brain co-opting traits like power and leadership, leaving the female brain with gossip and motherhood, may ruffle a few feathers. Perhaps the most refreshing section of this cerebral volume is devoted to what he calls "extreme" examples of the male brain-autism and its cousin, Asperger's syndrome. The author of previous autism books, including Mindblindness, Baron-Cohen offers curious lay readers a provocative discussion of male-female differences.
Copyright 2003 Reed Business Information, Inc.

Review

"Baron-Cohen offers curious lay readers a provocative discussion of male-female differences." -- - Publishers Weekly --This text refers to the Paperback edition.

See all Editorial Reviews

Product Details

• Hardcover: 256 pages
• Publisher: Basic Books (July 1, 2003)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 0738208442
• ISBN-13: 978-0738208442
• Product Dimensions: 9.3 x 6.2 x 1.1 inches
• Shipping Weight: 1.1 pounds
• Average Customer Review: 3.7 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (32 customer reviews)
• Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #459,143 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)

More About the Author

Discover books, learn about writers, read author blogs, and more.

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

131 of 144 people found the following review helpful

5.0 out of 5 stars Separate, but Equal October 29, 2003

By Stephen A. Haines HALL OF FAMEVINE™ VOICE

Format:Hardcover

After a lengthy and unwarranted disclaimer that his work isn't "sexist" [whatever that is], Baron-Cohen surveys the foundations of male and female minds. With a long clinical and teaching career, supported by an immense list of studies, he concludes that, in general, there are indeed "essential differences" in cognitive makeup between human genders. While there is a spectrum of characteristics, certain general frameworks exist attributable to men and women. For ease of analysis, he suggests that women are more empathic ["E" personalities] while men are more systematic ["S" personalities]. Each, he insists, has their role, with most people placed well within a median between extremes. The trends, however, are clear.

In a chatty style he likely uses speaking with patients, Baron-Cohen shows that women's empathic tendencies give them the power to quickly assess others' emotional states. Women more readily identify feelings in others, respond appropriately when sympathy is required and "reach out" in dealing with people. He stresses that this "intuitive sense" among women is almost universal and is rightfully well-regarded by all cultures. Men, on the other hand, operate under the need to understand "systems", organized conditions, mechanics, technology and are thus driven to know "how things work". This urge leads them away from the intimacy women have with others and, in the more extreme cases, are likely to become "loners". The most outstanding examples are those suffering from autism which is overwhelmingly a male condition.

Baron-Cohen has spent years studying autism, offering a range of examples. It may appear amusing that a five-year-old boy may be capable of memorizing dozens of car registrations and explain which car belongs to which house, but there are other factors to consider. Such boys grow into men who cannot readily converse, directly or over the telephone. They become the butt of teasing or hostility at their "withdrawn" state. If lacking compensation in other areas, such as a vocation that allows them to apply a narrow focus to tasks, they risk ostracism from society. Baron-Cohen offers an exceptional case of a mathematician whose genius brought him high awards, but who may fail to keep a lunch date due to some distraction. These are real problems affecting real people. Some of them may be your neighbours. One of them might even, unknowingly, be you.

This book challenges much misled thinking that has permeated gender studies over the past generation. Gender differences in outlook appear within a day of birth. Newborns shown a photograph of a face, or an object composed of facial elements resulted in girls preferring the face while the boys tended to select the object. This early division Baron-Cohen thinks may result from the testosterone surge baby boys undergo in the womb. "Maleness" and brain development are interlocked and continue to manifest with development. Baby girls, on the other hand, follow a different, parallel path. They appear to respond to distress in other people more readily than do boys. They will make eye contact with others more readily. The pattern continues through life, although at differing levels with individuals. Baron-Cohen stresses these differences don't represent "better" or "worse" values. Human males and females are overall equally intelligent. That intelligence is expressed in different ways. More to the point, men and women have both E and S traits, individually manifest over a wide spectrum. Extremes are few, but he notes extreme Es are more socially comfortable and acceptable than the autistic extreme S personalities.

Baron-Cohen doesn't limit himself to the results of clinical studies and calling for more research. He is keen to have readers begin to rethink how society should deal with those suffering from autism [Asperger's Syndrome]. He calls for a greater tolerance for "coldness" or "lack of sympathy". Self assessment is a good place to start building that tolerance. As a help to readers, a series of comprehensive tests is provided as Appendices. Take the tests and judge for yourself. But first, read the book to understand the issues involved. [stephen a. haines - Ottawa, Canada]

59 of 68 people found the following review helpful

5.0 out of 5 stars A gem! January 4, 2004

By David H Miller

Format:Hardcover

Before you start reading Baron-Cohen's fascinating book, go through the questionaire in the first appendix.

The questionaire, "Reading the Mind in the Eyes," has thirty-six photos cropped to show only the region around the eyes. By looking only at this small portion of the face, you have to figure out the emotion being expressed by the individual in the photo.

Chance would give only one out of four right answers. As Baron-Cohen remarks in the text, most people, when they take the quiz, find it extremely difficult -- one feels like one is guessing.

In fact, nearly everyone does much better than he or she expected. I got nearly two-thirds correct, and most people do even better.

This little quiz demonstrates one of the key points in the book: normal humans have an incredible ability to read the expressions, feelings, etc. of their fellow human beings from very subtle clues.

Baron-Cohen's thesis in his earlier book, "Mindblindness," was that autistic persons are simply people who lack this normal human "mind-reading" ability.

"The Essential Difference" expands this thesis to argue that, in this respect, autistic people are simply at a far end of a spectrum. Females (with numerous individual exceptions) tend towards the opposite end of the spectrum from autistic people: females are usually good empathizers, skilled at "mind-reading." Males tend to be less good at empathizing compared to females and better at "systemizing." Autistic people (who are predominantly male) lie at the extreme male end of the spectrum -- extraordinarily poor empathizers, good systemizers.

The author proves this case beyond reasonable doubt by both covering the scientific evidence and wittily discussing case studies. He focuses particularly on "high-functioning autism" and "Asperger's syndrome," exemplified by people who have normal to high intelligence and are able to function to some degree in normal society but who nonetheless exhibit a significant degree of mind-blindness.

So is there anything wrong with the book?

Baron-Cohen leans over backwards to emphasize that individuals who lean towards the high-systemizing/low-empathizing end of the spectrum are not deficient human beings or uncaring monsters. He states explicitly, "People with autism are often the most loyal defenders of someone they perceive to be suffering an injustice." Yet, in other places in the book, he suggests that it is easier for those who tend towards systemizing rather than empathizing to commit rape or murder!

The problem is an ambiguity in the word "empathy." On the one hand, it means the ability to read another's mood, to decode subtle cues of face, tone of voice, etc. As Baron-Cohen puts it, "Empathizing is about spontaneously and naturally tuning into the other person's thoughts and feelings..."

But, an alternative sense of "empathy" refers to an individual's ability to imaginatively put himself in the other person's position, to imagine how he himself would feel were he subjected to similar treatment.

The two meanings are very different. In the first sense, one cannot really have "empathy" for the subject of a newspaper story: without direct personal contact, you have no cues of facial expression and tone of voice to enable you to "naturally and spontaneously" tune in to the person's feelings. But, of course, in the second sense of "empathy," one might indeed, by imaginatively putting oneself in the same situation, achieve empathy for the person described in the news story.

Those who incline towards the Asperger's-syndrome/systemizing end of Baron-Cohen's behavioral spectrum lack "empathy" in the first sense of the word: i.e., they are lacking in the ability to spontaneously decode other people's feelings and intentions in direct social interaction. They lack a perceptual skill.

But, they still can (and they often do, as Baron-Cohen's comment about outrage towards injustice indicates) possess empathy in the second sense: this empathy relies on a conscious act of imagination and psychological projection, not on a perceptual ability to "psych out" other people.

Indeed, since there are some people (actors, con artists, some sorts of psychopaths) who possess the ability to convincingly project false cues of their feelings and intentions, people who are receptive to such cues (empathizers in Baron-Cohen's sense of the word) may be more likely to be deceived than those whose empathy is based on thought and imagination rather than instinctual response.

To put it concretely, Hitler might have found it easier to appeal to "empathizers" in Baron-Cohen's sense of the word than to people with Asperger's syndrome!

I am also somewhat skeptical of Baron-Cohen's hypothesis that severe autism is nothing but an exaggeration of normal male behavior. The "mindblindness" exhibited by those with severe autism is so debilitating that it seems likely that there is some underlying physiological cause. On the other hand, the moderately low level of empathizing seen among most males and, to a somewhat greater degree, among those with Asperger's syndrome is more easily explained simply as a matter of focus and interest.

Frankly, as a physicist, I find those people who might be deemed "normal" by Baron-Cohen's criteria to be people who demonstrate an extraordinarily unhealthy obsession with their fellow human beings. Humans are an interesting and important part of the universe -- but they're not everything! A small touch of Asperger's syndrome is, from the perspective of the universe at large, clearly more sane than what is generally considered "normalcy."

And, yet, I suspect that Baron-Cohen would listen patiently to such objections, acknowledge their possible validity, and consider how they could be validated or refuted. He comes across as a man motivated more by a passion for truth than a desire to win an argument.

"The Essential Difference" does not have, and does not claim to have, the final answers. But it does raise some fascinating questions and present the current state of knowledge in an informative, understandable, and entertaining manner. If you have any interest at all in the nature of your fellow human beings, it is worth reading.

29 of 33 people found the following review helpful

5.0 out of 5 stars The Gender Neutral Society April 15, 2006

By Cheryl Dellasega

Format:Paperback

As I immerse myself in the field of evolutionary psychology/biology and Baron-Cohen's work on biobehavioral differences in men and women, I wonder when and where a value judgement got placed on his proposal of men "systematizing" being better or worse than a female tendancy to "empathize"? Don't we need both types to complete each other?

There wasn't one claim in this book (that I could find) that the author's conclusions are attached to a value judgement, nor does he claim EVERY woman is an "E" and EVERY men an "S". Other evidence supports him: studies of women with higher testosterone levels show they act in more aggressive and traditionally "masculine" systematizing ways, while Shelley Taylor's pivotal study on oxytocin, a female hormone, proved a connection to nurturing behaviors. But how is that somehow "bad"?

This doesn't mean (nor do I think Baron-Cohen claims) that we need rigid rules prohibiting or allowing certain opportunities and behaviors for men and women. It does help us to understand and learn from each other--and perhaps have better relationships. As I discussed this book the other day with a colleague that "light bulb" moment occurred, and she realized why her significant other was so much more driven to compartmentalize than she was--it's how he's hardwired, for the most part. It's been documented that women tend to pick friends for relationships, not as basketball or golf buddies, as their husbands mind. In retail, women apologize, men replace or resolve. Don't we need both approaches?

Let's not consider this book a canon for behavior, but use it for the valuable and insightful observations that can help us cast aside judgements about superiority of either gender and accept each other for our strengths--and weaknesses.