Skip to main content

The Pattern Seekers - Simon Baron-Cohen ****

There are two main concepts in this book - one is that the thing that makes humans special is what Simon Baron-Cohen refers to as a systemizing mechanism in the brain, and the other is that two of the spectra all humans sit on is how much we are systemizers and how much we are empathisers. Although it's possible to be strong on both spectra, many who are particularly strong on one are not very strong on the other. And although they aren't the same thing, people diagnosed on the autism spectrum are more likely than the average person to be strong systemizers.

We'll come back to the detail of the invention part of the subtitle, but in some ways, the aspect of the systemizing as what makes humans different is not particularly original. I've seen plenty of examples (including What Do You Think You Are?) of books that suggest our uniqueness comes from the interplay between seeing the world through patterns and the ability to ask 'What if?' Baron-Cohen uses a rather clumsy formulation of the process as 'If-and-then', but for me that felt artificial.

One of his many examples is 'If he closely examined the sole of his basketball boot and shaved off a few millimetres then he would achieve an improvement.' This seems little more than a convoluted way of saying 'If he shaved a few millimetres off the sole of his basketball boot then he would achieve an improvement' - the classic computing IF... THEN. Of course, as he points out, you can add in more ANDs, but I'd argue that the basic format really is If... then.

However, this niggle apart, I was impressed by both the assertion that invention was a result of being a strong systemizer - hence trying it out all sorts of different possibilities and structuring the outcome to be most likely to come up with something really original - and that this makes modern Homo sapiens different from both the other animals and other hominids, such as Homo erectus and Homo neanderthalensis. 

Baron-Cohen gives many examples to overcome the obvious argument that a good few other animals (for example chimps and crows), plus these other hominids use or used tools. He shows convincingly that while this is true, both the animal and early hominid use of tools seemed to be a result of learned behaviour. So, for example, hand axes were used well over a million years ago - but they remained the same. There was no invention, no development. What was likely to be an accidental discovery was sustained but never developed. Human invention, which seems to have started around 70,000 years ago, is a totally different phenomenon, because, Baron-Cohen argues, of the systemizing mechanism.

Given his speciality, it's no surprise that Baron-Cohen spends a fair amount of time covering the difficulties those with a diagnosis of autism face, and how these can be overcome, pointing out that the overlap between this and being strong systemizers means that with the right support, there is an opportunity for more of those with a diagnosis to have satisfying and useful employment, something that is relatively rarely the case at the moment.

I did have one issue with the book - it felt more like a long article that had been stretched to fit book form. There is a significant amount of repetition of different examples of 'if-and-then', and it's quite a shock to get to page 148 of a 230-page book and find it ends (the rest is appendices, notes and index). However, I've no doubt that this is an interesting and valuable contribution both to the discussion of invention and what makes humans different, plus our understanding of human neurodiversity.

Paperback:

Kindle:  
Using these links earns us commission at no cost to you
Review by Brian Clegg
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Laws of Thought - Tom Griffiths *****

In giving us a history of attempts to explain our thinking abilities, Tom Griffiths demonstrates an excellent ability to pitch information just right for the informed general reader.  We begin with Aristotelian logic and the way Boole and others transformed it into a kind of arithmetic before a first introduction of computing and theories of language. Griffiths covers a surprising amount of ground - we don't just get, for instance, the obvious figures of Turing, von Neumann and Shannon, but the interaction between the computing pioneers and those concerned with trying to understand the way we think - for example in the work of Jerome Bruner, of whom I confess I'd never heard.  This would prove to be the case with a whole host of people who have made interesting contributions to the understanding of human thought processes. Sometimes their theories were contradictory - this isn't an easy field to successfully observe - but always they were interesting. But for me, at least, ...
Post a Comment
Read more

The AI Paradox - Virginia Dignum ****

This is a really important book in the way that Virginia Dignum highlights various ways we can misunderstand AI and its abilities using a series of paradoxes. However, I need to say up front that I'm giving it four stars for the ideas: unfortunately the writing is not great. It reads more like a government report than anything vaguely readable - it really should have co-authored with a professional writer to make it accessible. Even so, I'm recommending it: like some government reports it's significant enough to make it necessary to wade through the bureaucrat speak. Why paradoxes? Dignum identifies two ways we can think about paradoxes (oddly I wrote about paradoxes recently , but with three definitions): a logical paradox such as 'this statement is false', or a paradoxical truth such as 'less is more' - the second of which seems a better to fit to the use here.  We are then presented with eight paradoxes, each of which gives some insights into aspects of t...
Post a Comment
Read more

Einstein's Fridge - Paul Sen ****

In Einstein's Fridge (interesting factoid: this is at least the third popular science book to be named after Einstein's not particularly exciting refrigerator), Paul Sen has taken on a scary challenge. As Jim Al-Khalili made clear in his excellent The World According to Physics , our physical understanding of reality rests on three pillars: relativity, quantum theory and thermodynamics. But there is no doubt that the third of these, the topic of Sen's book, is a hard sell. While it's true that these are the three pillars of physics, from the point of view of making interesting popular science, the first two might be considered pillars of gold and platinum, while the third is a pillar of salt. Relativity and quantum theory are very much of the twentieth century. They are exciting and sometimes downright weird and wonderful. Thermodynamics, by contrast, has a very Victorian feel and, well, is uninspiring. Luckily, though, thermodynamics is important enough, lying behind ...
Post a Comment
Read more