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.



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


Popular posts from this blog

A Citizen's Guide to Artificial Intelligence - John Zerilli et al ****

The cover of this book set off a couple of alarm bells. Not only does that 'Citizen's Guide' part of the title raise the spectre of a pompous book-length moan, the list of seven authors gives the feel of a thesis written by committee. It was a real pleasure, then, to discover that this is actually a very good book. I ought to say straight away what it isn't - despite that title, it isn't a book written in a style that's necessarily ideal for a general audience. Although the approach is often surprisingly warm and human, it is an academic piece of writing. As a result, in places it's a bit of a trudge to get through it. Despite this, though, the topic is important enough - and, to be fair, the way it is approached is good enough - that it deserves to be widely read. John Zerilli et al give an effective, very balanced exploration of artificial intelligence. Although not structured as such, it's a SWOT analysis, giving us the strengths, weaknesses, opportun

Grace Lindsay - Four Way Interview

Grace Lindsay is a computational neuroscientist currently based at University College, London. She completed her PhD at the Centre for Theoretical Neuroscience at Columbia University, where her research focused on building mathematical models of how the brain controls its own sensory processing. Before that, she earned a bachelor’s degree in Neuroscience from the University of Pittsburgh and received a research fellowship to study at the Bernstein Center for Computational Neuroscience in Freiburg, Germany. She was awarded a Google PhD Fellowship in Computational Neuroscience in 2016 and has spoken at several international conferences. She is also the producer and co-host of Unsupervised Thinking , a podcast covering topics in neuroscience and artificial intelligence. Her first book is Models of the Mind . Why science? I started my undergraduate degree as a neuroscience and philosophy double major and I think what drew me to both topics was the idea that if we just think rigorously enou

The Science of Can and Can't - Chiara Marletto *****

Without doubt, Chiara Marletto has achieved something remarkable here, though the nature of the topic does not make for an easy read. The book is an attempt to popularise constructor theory - a very different approach to physics, which Oxford quantum physicist David Deutsch has developed with Marletto. Somewhat oddly, the book doesn't use the term constructor theory, but rather the distinctly clumsier 'science of can and can't'. The idea is that physics is formulated in a way that is inherently limited because it depends on using mechanisms that follows the progress of dynamic systems using the laws of physics. This method isn't applicable in circumstances where either something may happen, but won't necessarily, nor where something isn't allowed to happen (hence the science of can and can't, which probably should be the science of could and can't if we are going to be picky). Deutsch and Marletto have proposed a way of using 'counterfactuals'