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

David Spiegelhalter Five Way interview

Professor Sir David Spiegelhalter FRS OBE is Emeritus Professor of Statistics in the Centre for Mathematical Sciences at the University of Cambridge. He was previously Chair of the Winton Centre for Risk and Evidence Communication and has presented the BBC4 documentaries Tails you Win: the Science of Chance, the award-winning Climate Change by Numbers. His bestselling book, The Art of Statistics , was published in March 2019. He was knighted in 2014 for services to medical statistics, was President of the Royal Statistical Society (2017-2018), and became a Non-Executive Director of the UK Statistics Authority in 2020. His latest book is The Art of Uncertainty . Why probability? because I have been fascinated by the idea of probability, and what it might be, for over 50 years. Why is the ‘P’ word missing from the title? That's a good question.  Partly so as not to make it sound like a technical book, but also because I did not want to give the impression that it was yet another book

The Genetic Book of the Dead: Richard Dawkins ****

When someone came up with the title for this book they were probably thinking deep cultural echoes - I suspect I'm not the only Robert Rankin fan in whom it raised a smile instead, thinking of The Suburban Book of the Dead . That aside, this is a glossy and engaging book showing how physical makeup (phenotype), behaviour and more tell us about the past, with the messenger being (inevitably, this being Richard Dawkins) the genes. Worthy of comment straight away are the illustrations - this is one of the best illustrated science books I've ever come across. Generally illustrations are either an afterthought, or the book is heavily illustrated and the text is really just an accompaniment to the pictures. Here the full colour images tie in directly to the text. They are not asides, but are 'read' with the text by placing them strategically so the picture is directly with the text that refers to it. Many are photographs, though some are effective paintings by Jana Lenzová. T

Everything is Predictable - Tom Chivers *****

There's a stereotype of computer users: Mac users are creative and cool, while PC users are businesslike and unimaginative. Less well-known is that the world of statistics has an equivalent division. Bayesians are the Mac users of the stats world, where frequentists are the PC people. This book sets out to show why Bayesians are not just cool, but also mostly right. Tom Chivers does an excellent job of giving us some historical background, then dives into two key aspects of the use of statistics. These are in science, where the standard approach is frequentist and Bayes only creeps into a few specific applications, such as the accuracy of medical tests, and in decision theory where Bayes is dominant. If this all sounds very dry and unexciting, it's quite the reverse. I admit, I love probability and statistics, and I am something of a closet Bayesian*), but Chivers' light and entertaining style means that what could have been the mathematical equivalent of debating angels on