Customer Reviews

Within Reason: Rationality and Human Behavior

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

 

 

The introduction was intriguing, with its references to the paradoxical barbarity that had manifested itself in a highly educated society like Nazi Germany, but I had the impression that Calne tried to be too far reaching in his attempts to fit rationality in its proper place within human behavior. One of his basic premises is that rationality is not an end in itself, but rather a tool employed on the behalf of human instincts. While this certainly has a ring of truth to it, the thesis is by no means radical, which is why I wonder if abler attempts have been made to dissect the role of reason within human behavior. I would recommend skimming Calne's book if one had the opportunity to examine his major premises, but otherwise I was left dissatisfied by my sense that the topic he was trying to tackle was a much bigger fish than his line could handle.

Within Reason is one of the most stimulating books I've read in some time.

Dr. Calne discusses issues surrounding the brain (still one of life's great mysteries) that most of us either take for granted or haven't even begun to consider. His writings draw from an impressive range of sources: scientific, medical, historical, cultural, sociological, religious and beyond. Furthermore, his warm and lucid writing style is exceptionally readable.

Whether or not one agrees with each and every one of Dr. Calne's views is not the issue. For me, this book's greatest value lies in its ability to explain abstract concepts involving the brain, reason and human behaviour and to generate considerable thought and conversation.

This is a book written by an important neurologist and researcher who is not simply talking to himself and his peers -- he is talking to me, the layperson.

The core argument of this book, that reason or rational thinking is a value-free activity, which we can put to whatever use we please, is indisputable. At the same time, I think there is great value in stating the argument as directly as this book does. However, the discussion in the book is often reductive, digressive at best, scattered at worst. In addition, the author's own phobias and neuroses are frequently on display (a rather morbid view of sex is an example). A good editor probably could have done wonders to focus the author's work and eliminate some of the overt weirdness.

The subject deserves a more nuanced and better edited discussion.

I expected the author to discuss the relation between reason and goodness, especially since he raises the provocative paradox early in the book about how very intelligent and reasonable people can do bad and evil things. His thesis is that reason/intelligence/science is morally neutral, and that our behavior is motivated by instinct, independent of our intellects. So he ends up explaining all the puzzling aspects of human behavior as instinctive: psychopaths lack brain module X, religious people have overactive brain module Y., etc. The result is intellectually unsatisfying. The author leaves us with no rationaL criteria to classify actions as right or wrong, good or bad. I far prefer Brand Blanshard's Reason and Goodness (1966) on this topic.

Look, this is not the most well-written book (Calne is a scientist after all, not a writer). It's not the best page-turner either.

But the reason this is a good book is because of its thesis and subsequent discussion of rationality and its psychological correlates. There aren't enough books out there that deal with this, so it's a swig of cold water to read this one.

Of course, David Hume came to these same conclusions almost 4 centuries ago. The insight is not what's original, but the attempt to anchor it within the scientific (rather than philosophic) framework is. The implications of the idea that Reason is just a tool for getting what we want are significant for philosophy (especially ethics and political philosophy). Read the book; skim it if necessary, but it is worth your money.

At last, a new, non-technical work that examines the role of rationality (vs. emotionality) in determining human behavior. Donald Calne has written a readable and thorough study of the role of reason in religion, commerce, government, the arts, science, and behavior. He ponders the nature of the human mind and where it dwells. This is a fascinating work, lucidly written so that it is easily accessible to the lay reader, in which the author provides an elaborate reference work to the writings of many great philosophers on these subjects.

Highly recommended to all those interested in the nature of human consiousness, and the extent to which rational thought rules our actions.

Why this book exists probably has more to do with marketing than anything current intellectually. The book is marketed as if this neurologist had something to say about how the wiring of the brain sheds light on reason--as if he were one of the recent crop of neurologists (e.g., Damasio, LeDoux) shedding light on the brain. In fact, he is not This is mostly philosophy, not neurology. His philosphical assumptions come from a classical education, circa 1950, with no hint of what has happened since. He seems not even to know how to discriminate between his interpretative assumptions and what he is claiming to interpret. And what little--and it is precious little-he says about neurology is at odds with all of the currently important neurological studies of thought. This guy is behind the times in his own field, or else just intellectually incompetent to understand his field. BTW, I have no problem with the basic thesis: I agree with it completely. But the notion of reason as an instrument is extremely old, and better developed by others decades, if not centuries, ago.

This book is more of a manifesto than an education. Calne sets forth statements with which I largely agree, while giving short shrift to the basis for those statements and even less attention to the consequences of the truth of those statements.

This is not a book about why we should agree with Calne, and it is not a book about what people who agree with Calne should do -- it is merely a book explaining what Calne believes. I was in the market for a book that gives his fellow-travellers, like me, some ammunition for argument and discussion, and even some things to think about. But this is not that book. At best, it's preaching to the choir.

Calne presents a theory -- an extremely ancient one -- that reason is limited in its applicability; it's just a "tool". Reason, he says, can determine means to goals (the "how") but cannot help us determine what those goals should be (the "why"). This is old stuff, but I bought the book because its blurbs suggested that Calne was about to attempt the unprecedented: substantiate this hoary old falsehood with some hard evidence.

He does not do so. Not even close. Amazon's Paul Hughes correctly identifies the fact that Calne _starts off assuming his thesis_, then uses it to reach -- his thesis (no kidding!) "If we assume X to be true, examination of the evidence will reveal that X is true." This is how cults, conspiracy theorists and the academic left conduct their business -- not rational men.

The interesting neurological information which is Calne's forte, is not related to the (circular) main argument in any way, thereby leaving that argument without its advertised scientific evidence. Non sequiturs don't count.

B.F. Skinner is not mentioned anywhere in the book, but his reductionistic theory of behaviourism is assumed _a priori_ (again) by Calne. That explains Calne's complete ignorance of free will, of the role of ethical values and of rational _evaluation_. The power to rationally evaluate and choose between alternatives is why we have ethics at all!

These great gaping omissions would certainly explain such absurdities as Calne's reference to "reason" as being a tool that serves dictators equally as well with democracies. Whatever it is, this "reason" he's discussing -- it isn't reason, but a gored straw man.

This book deals with an epistemological topic, but Calne has no background in his education or bibliography for it. It's rather poetic, that he should wave around the epistemological weapon of "Galileo's knife" (observation before theory) and wind up being impaled upon it.

For the rational basis of the opposing principle, the book to read is "Introduction to Objectivist Epistemology" by Ayn Rand.

If you depend very much on reason in your thinking, as I do, then you will find this book extremely helpful.

Because reason is a product of biological evolution, you can expect to encounter limits and problems in applying it.

Reason is not the panacea it is often portrayed as. You need to know what those limits and problems are in order to avoid unnecessary mistakes when you apply it.

This book demonstrates those limits and problems.

This book complements The Evolution of Reason: Logic as a Branch of Biology (Cambridge Studies in Philosophy and Biology).