Most Helpful Customer Reviews
355 of 434 people found the following review helpful:
1.0 out of 5 stars
In three words? Awful. Awful. Awful., August 4, 2009
This review is from: A Whole New Mind: Why Right-Brainers Will Rule the Future (Paperback)
The central premise of this book is that people with slightly more right-brain skills will dominate the work force in the 21st century... or at least be much more important than the past 20 years. I bought this book because that is a premise I agree with, so I was curious to see how he demonstrated his point, or any advice he could offer.
What I got was page after page of uninformed conjecture, hyperbole, cliches, and self-important blather. His premise? Left-brained work has dominated the industrial age, and the next "phase" of human development is what he decided to label the "conceptual age," where right-directed people will dominate.
Really? You really think that? That's a hell of a statement... I hope you can back it up with some hard data... statistics, job growth numbers, etc? Anything?
Nope.
He claims the drivers towards the "Conceptual Age" are Abundance, Asia, and Automation. That's it. No further proof. Let's take these one at a time:
Firstly, because of "Abundance", people are looking for better designs, even for ordinary household tools... thus designers become important. And apparently this is a new idea??? He believes that the words from the latest CEO of GM -- who said his job is to produce works of art that people drive -- as being somehow monumental. Oh my god! GM designs cars! They now care about "form" as well as "function!"
Really??? You really think that's a new thing? So I guess then those fins on a 1956 Chevy are there for aerodynamic purposes... and the mountains of chrome were there to make it more visible at night. Apparently the author is equally ignorant of the real drivers of the "left-brained" industrial revolution in the 19th century: the production of cheap textiles for clothing. YEP! The industrial revolution existed for the benefit of fashion designers and other "right brained" people who were tired of the ordinary abundance of the tunic. And how much of the computer revolution existed because people wanted a more "personalized" computer experience for their home or business? Ever hear of the iMac???
The author should try to do some research once in a while...
Secondly, because of "Asia," a lot of left-brian jobs -- computer programming, accounting, and legal -- are moving to Asia. Whereas right-brian jobs that require artistic design, communication, empathy, play, and meaning stay right in the USA. Since these jobs are "high-touch" jobs, they can't be outsourced.
Really??? You really think right-brain jobs cant be outsourced? I got a graphic designer in the Philippines who says differently. I got a dozen "empathy hotlines" you can call if you're feeling like killing yourself, and they'll do a hell of a lot better talking you down from the ledge than your friends or family. I also know of some really good customer support centers in India who are highly trained in empathic communication. Ever hear of teleconferencing or telepresence? Right-brained jobs are just as easily outsourced with the right technology.
Jobs are moving to Asia for one basic reason: SUPPLY AND DEMAND. Nothing more. Most American businesses prefer American workers, simply because culture differences, currency exchange rates, and time zones are a pain to deal with... but Asian workers are so much cheaper that they are worth the extra pain. However, these wages are only low in Asia because Asian industries are not big enough to demand local software developers, lawyers, and accountants. Once Asia becomes more industrialized, local businesses will be demanding up the local talent... which decreases their supply... which drives Asian wages up... which makes American talent more attractive to American businesses again.
This is just cyclical unemployment on a global scale: no more. Again... some research by the author would have been nice...
Thirdly, because of "Automation," those who just follow a well-defined process will be easily replaced by robots, computers, or Asians (apparently). In other words... technology eliminates low-skill jobs. SHOCKER! But of course, this isn't actually true. As any economics professor will tell you, technology is disruptive, but it doesn't eliminate jobs in the long run. The simple fact is that workers who learn how to use the new technology become more productive, and therefore more valuable to their employers! Yes, job responsibilities shift around a bit, but overall productivity increases, which creates more jobs in the medium term.
Then the author goes on to the second section of the book, which contains anecdotes about what skills will be important in the 21st century: design (agree), story (maybe), "symphony" (give me a break...), empathy (big agreement there), play (agree), and meaning (agree). The stories are good reading, but they are never supported by any hard data. There is evidence of a fad, but no evidence of a trend.
The single saving grace of this book are the right-brain exercises. They are pretty fun ways for a left-brain-leaning person to step out of their comfort zone and flex the right brain a little. If you find this book in the bargain bin for $5, then its worth it just for the exercises.
Otherwise, you'll probably want to avoid it...
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
14 of 17 people found the following review helpful:
2.0 out of 5 stars
This is a really mediocre book about thinking, May 19, 2011
This review is from: A Whole New Mind: Why Right-Brainers Will Rule the Future (Paperback)
Forget the left brain/right brain thing which is an outdated metaphor. Within this review I will ignore it. Modern neuroscience suggests this categorization of the brain hemispheres is not accurate. This book is really about thinking well; but, it adds little vs better books written decades ago such as Michael Gelb's How to Think Like Leonardo da Vinci: Seven Steps to Genius Every Day and Edward De Bono Lateral Thinking: Creativity Step by Step (Perennial Library).
Pink makes a lot of false assumptions. He considers that the vast majority of white collar professionals (doctors, lawyers, engineers, analysts, programmers) lack any creative thinking ability. He ignores that they are problem solvers. And, problem solving is very creative. Pink relies on studies that supposedly conclude that IQ accounts for only 4% of career success. Meanwhile, the vast majority of successful people most probably have IQs of 125+ (95th percentile and above). He advances that a Masters in Fine Arts (MFA) is more valuable and better recognized than an MBA. Later, he quotes someone stating that they prefer poets to MBAs for managers. Another time, he mentions Australian parents stating they would rather have their children go into nursing than software engineering. Also, he quotes an executive "GM is in the art business." Somehow, Pink loves to refer to the nonsensical.
Pink misses the linkage between job functions. He advances that design is now the master discipline that only creative types can practice proficiently and is leaving all white collar professionals behind. He forgets that for any one product designer you need several patent lawyers, business plan forecasting accountants, mechanical engineers, and programmers. And, that these professionals solve related issues that are just as creatively challenging as the product designer.
Another flawed assumption Pink makes is that Indians (from India) are just like American white collar professionals not creative. He was wrong about the Americans. He is wrong about the Indians. He goes on about all the routine jobs being outsourced to India. He ignores some of the leading consulting firms are Indian. And, these compete already for the most lucrative product development projects worldwide. It is not just the rote stuff that can get outsourced.
Pink when he is not wrong deals with truisms. His chapter on Empathy smacks of that. Doctors should be more empathetic. Women are more empathetic than men. "Sometimes we need detachment; many other times we need attunement." Ok, how many more truisms do you need to read over 30 pages? The chapter on Play is also somewhat truistic. Yet, you probably won't feel like joining a laughing club. Aren't Woody Allen movies good enough for that?
Pink has also a world macroeconomic/demographic vision that is off. Everything is about outsourcing and automating. If you are a (supposedly noncreative) white collar type, you will soon be replaced by either software or someone in Bangalore. No wonder Thomas Friedman considers it "my favorite business book." This is because it supports his own The World Is Flat: A Brief History of the Twenty-first Century vision. Although superficially convincing, both Pink and Friedman are off. Instead, a far more relevant framework is Richard Florida's. He thinks the world is actually getting increasingly spikier with ever greater concentration of well educated people in just a few cities worldwide. That is because of the network effect. Knowledge workers cluster in specific areas: venture capitalists in Palo Alto, petroleum engineers in Houston, financiers in London, advertising types in Chicago. The Internet has done nothing to flatten those centers. To the contrary, it has accelerated their concentration of talent.
Richard Florida derives the relevant framework because he defines his creative class correctly by capturing all the problem solving white collar professionals Pink so denigrates (reference: The Rise of the Creative Class: And How It's Transforming Work, Leisure, Community and Everyday Life). In Florida's books and blog (at the Atlantic), he constantly uncovers interesting relationships between his creative class and various positive economic outcomes precisely depicted with scatter plots and regression coefficients. Meanwhile, Pink uses no supportive data and just refers to outlying studies that don't make sense (like IQ does not matter in career success).
Pink sometimes brands his six senses using the wrong words. For instance "Symphony" has little to do with music. It has to do with synthesizing information. A more accurate description would be simply: Synthesis.
Occasionally, Pink's recommended activities have nothing to do with practicing his cognitive senses. He thinks one of the best ways of learning synthesis is learning how to draw. So, now on page 145 he manages to draw a portrait of Mark Wahlberg, the actor, that he confuses for his own (see his picture on page 167) and he thinks he is a good synthesis thinker.
Finally, Pink's six senses won't help you much in your career more than they already do. That's because you already are proficient at them. In the body of the book, Pink forgets we are human beings with a life outside work that develops our abilities to tell stories, play, empathize, etc... He recalls that only on the last page, when he states: "[His six senses] are fundamentally human attributes... They reside in all of us, and need only be nurtured into being." Now, you know it. You already do all that stuff.
If you want to succeed do the opposite of what Pink suggests. Instead of practicing telling stories or joining a laughing club study Marcus Buckingham's Now, Discover Your Strengths. You will uncover what you are good at and know how to get even better at it. It will teach you to focus which is just the opposite of Pink's theory (doing all sorts of activities that are distracting you from your objectives).
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
23 of 30 people found the following review helpful:
2.0 out of 5 stars
Return of the flower child--why we may be in trouble if the author's right-brainers rule the future., March 30, 2009
This review is from: A Whole New Mind: Why Right-Brainers Will Rule the Future (Paperback)
William Blake wrote "London," his blistering, loud poem vehemently denouncing the Age of Reason, before the end of the 18th century. Shortly prior to Blake's poem, Immanuel Kant delivered his daunting philosophical treatise "Critique of Pure Reason," but it was Blake who blamed all of the ills of civilization--from oppressive laws, military institutions, and patriarchal church dogma--on his culture's replacement of the Imagination by the "mind-forged manacles" of Reason and Logic. In the 19th century the Romantic Age followed these texts with many more privileging the imaginative faculty above all else--by Wordsworth, Coleridge, Shelley, Keats, Byron--all mapping the inner cosmos of inspiration and creativity that had been overlooked by the 17th-18th century Age of Enlightenment.
You won't find the foregoing history of ideas in "A Whole New Mind": the author declares that everything prior to the 20th century was the "Agricultural Age" while most of the 20th century was the "Industrial Age," followed by the "Information Age" from which we are now emerging into the "Conceptual Age" (the period when the "right brain" will finally receive its due).
This is welterweight reading, and the author is so loose and careless (if not carefree) with his terminology that the book becomes an argument not on behalf of but against anything resembling a thesis about the importance of "right-brained" thinkers, creators, and personality types: the book could clearly profit from what the author speaks of disparagingly as "left-brained," or "analytic" thinking. The argument is without intellectual rigor, consistent or precise definitions, insights or useful information. It's a feel-good, quick read that tells the reader what he wants to hear--be your intuitive, creative, imaginative self, secure in the knowledge that you're needed (to figure out the economy?).
The absurdities are too numerous to mention. For example, right-brain thinking is associated both with "simultaneous" thinking and with "telling stories" and "listening to music." In other words, the author doesn't understand the distinction between "spatialized" arts such as painting and photography and "temporal" (i.e. sequential rather than simultaneous) arts like narrative and music. "Be a poet," he says, without showing the least bit of evidence that he understands the sequential, developmental nature of, say, a Shakespearean sonnet. And don't tell this author that it's foolhardy to prove a negative: he uses Al Gore's defeat in the 2002 presidential election as proof of the superiority of the right brain because clearly the Florida ballots with the confusing boxes and chads had to have been constructed by someone with a right-brain deficiency! Finally, the author declares that right-brained thinkers are distinguished by (drum-roll) their interest in, and pursuit of, "Meaning" (it would be nice to see more evidence of it).
If you need any more excuses not to waste your time on a book that belabors the obvious (and not very well), I finished the book on a flight from Houston to Detroit. When I got off the plane, I saw advertising signs in the airport that were inarguably of the same persuasion, and of the same depth, as the author's insights: "Imagination rules!" "We're the leader in design!" (The author equates "design" with right brain thinking; "function" with left.) And "Unleash your wild side!" Obviously, the battle has been won.
If you follow the author's instructions to suspend the critical faculty, those three slogans come close to representing as much as this book has to offer. To his credit, the author does encourage readers to listen to a good symphony--no hints about how to do so--that would require some use of the critical faculty about which the author appears relatively clueless. But how could you expect anything more from someone who attributes the discovery of velcro, clearly an example of inductive reasoning based upon empirical evidence, to a "metaphor"? To put it plainly, you don't have to be a poet or a mathematician to cringe all the way through this book.
Followed to its "illogical" conclusion, Americans can, in the near future, only expect to fall further behind the left-brained Asian upsurge in reason and logic that is threatening to make us a second-rate, dependent nation in the international arena. Whereas formerly it was the mystic East that contemplated the Divine while we in the West followed the Puritanical work ethic directing us to build Fords and invent computers, the tables have been turned. "Make a virtue of necessity," the author seems to be saying, "Discover within yourself the soul of a poet."
The author's assurance that your employer will love you all the more would sound less hollow had we not already indulged our imaginative fantasies with the flower children of the 1960s. Woodstock is done and near-forgotten. Time to move on. Shakespeare's language will not be understood by the reader who suspends grammatical logic any more than Beethoven's will make sense to someone who chooses to ignore sonata form. The mind that Pink writes about is a perfect fit with the one that Madison Avenue pursues on a relentless, daily basis.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
|
![[Start the discussion]](http://g-ecx.images-amazon.com/images/G/01/x-locale/communities/discussion_boards/start-new-discussion-sec._V192250339_.gif){kind=small}
