Skip to main content

Mind Shift - John Parrington ***

It seems at the moment as if every other science book that's published is on the human brain - but Mind Shift is anything but a 'me too' title. John Parrington gives us a very personal take on what it is to be human from the viewpoint of the mind/brain.

The key theme of the book, we are told is that social interaction, language and culture have been responsible for shaping the human brain and making us the exceptional animals we are (obviously there's an element of chicken and egg here). I say 'we are told' because Parrington tells us this is what he is doing a lot, but it's quite hard to extract the message from a very long book that doesn't really have a structure that reflects that thesis. Instead we get a lot of relatively short chapters on topics that range from mental illness and diversity to the genome and epigenetics. 

Part of the problem with getting the message is that large sections of the book feel like reading a literature review as Parrington gives us the results of study after study without weaving these findings into a usefully structured narrative. The level of the content is very variable too. Parrington is a professor of molecular and cellular pharmacology, and when he is writing about the physical nature of the brain he comes across as authoritative - but many sections are dealing with anything from psychology to the arts and religion and here the writing is more subjective and quite hard for the reader to tie into the theme.

Obviously psychology is important to this discussion, but Parrington relies hugely on the work of a 1930s Soviet psychologist called Lev Vygotsky - so much so, that the book in places reads like a love letter to Vykotsky, he gets mentioned so much. However, what Parrington doesn't really examine is what Wikipedia delicately puts as 'Vygotsky is the subject of great scholarly dispute'. Similarly, many studies in psychology have been either discredited or at least doubted since the replication crisis, yet in reporting on psychology results, Parrington does not explore this. He also gives a surprising amount of notice to the largely discredited ideas of Freud, even though he does point out the issues with Freud's work.

When Parrington writes about religion, literature, music, politics and other such topics the approach taken does not necessarily help communicate much to the reader. So, for example, he spends six pages discussing Wuthering Heights, a book, I suspect, many of his audience will never have read. Because of their personal nature, there is also the feeling that these parts of the book are perhaps rather less fully researched than are the sections more focused on the physical aspects of the brain. So, for example, Parrington tells us that 'the Bible begins with the phrase "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and God was the Word."' - a phrase that on a copy I looked at occurs on page 1165. 

What we have here is a genuinely interesting, but flawed book. I think Parrington's theme is fascinating, and the book is loaded with ideas, it's just a shame that the message doesn't emerge in any clear way from his writing.

Hardback: 
Bookshop.org

  

Kindle 
Using these links earns us commission at no cost to you
Review by Peter Spitz

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Philip Ball - How Life Works Interview

Philip Ball is one of the most versatile science writers operating today, covering topics from colour and music to modern myths and the new biology. He is also a broadcaster, and was an editor at Nature for more than twenty years. He writes regularly in the scientific and popular media and has written many books on the interactions of the sciences, the arts, and wider culture, including Bright Earth: The Invention of Colour, The Music Instinct, and Curiosity: How Science Became Interested in Everything. His book Critical Mass won the 2005 Aventis Prize for Science Books. Ball is also a presenter of Science Stories, the BBC Radio 4 series on the history of science. He trained as a chemist at the University of Oxford and as a physicist at the University of Bristol. He is also the author of The Modern Myths. He lives in London. His latest title is How Life Works . Your book is about the ’new biology’ - how new is ’new’? Great question – because there might be some dispute about that! Many

Stephen Hawking: Genius at Work - Roger Highfield ****

It is easy to suspect that a biographical book from highly-illustrated publisher Dorling Kindersley would be mostly high level fluff, so I was pleasantly surprised at the depth Roger Highfield has worked into this large-format title. Yes, we get some of the ephemera so beloved of such books, such as a whole page dedicated to Hawking's coxing blazer - but there is plenty on Hawking's scientific life and particularly on his many scientific ideas. I've read a couple of biographies of Hawking, but I still came across aspects of his lesser fields here that I didn't remember, as well as the inevitable topics, ranging from Hawking radiation to his attempts to quell the out-of-control nature of the possible string theory universes. We also get plenty of coverage of what could be classified as Hawking the celebrity, whether it be a photograph with the Obamas in the White House, his appearances on Star Trek TNG and The Big Bang Theory or representations of him in the Simpsons. Ha

The Blind Spot - Adam Frank, Marcelo Gleiser and Evan Thompson ****

This is a curate's egg - sections are gripping, others rather dull. Overall the writing could be better... but the central message is fascinating and the book gets four stars despite everything because of this. That central message is that, as the subtitle says, science can't ignore human experience. This is not a cry for 'my truth'. The concept comes from scientists and philosophers of science. Instead it refers to the way that it is very easy to make a handful of mistakes about what we are doing with science, as a result of which most people (including many scientists) totally misunderstand the process and the implications. At the heart of this is confusing mathematical models with reality. It's all too easy when a mathematical model matches observation well to think of that model and its related concepts as factual. What the authors describe as 'the blind spot' is a combination of a number of such errors. These include what the authors call 'the bifur