Skip to main content

Of Sound Mind - Nina Kraus ***

Like most genres, popular science goes through phases - for the last couple of years, neuroscience has been the in thing, to the extent that I tend to think 'not another brain book' when I see one - but for someone who has always sung, the idea of finding out more about the relationship between the brain and sound, especially music, was attractive. 

Nina Kraus is certainly enthusiastic about her topic and generally the book is well-pitched (appropriate given the musical connotations) and readable. However, Kraus does occasionally fall for a classic academic's failing of making use of unnecessary jargon. For example, she defines two terms 'afferent' and 'efferent', apparently adjectives for direction of travel. Kraus even points out how easily confused they are - so why use them? This isn't a textbook - there's no need to load the reader with all the jargon.

Some sections worked particularly well for me. The chapters on language and sound were very interesting, as were those on noise and ageing. Kraus demonstrates well how sustained background noise - even at relatively low levels - can have a negative impact on achievements. The positive outcomes of being an active musician are also of interest. I use the term 'active' here, as Kraus emphasises that listening to music is good, but to gain the benefits she mentions you have to play an instrument or sing, not just listen. Those benefits are in having an improvement in your 'sound mind', something Kraus defines as 'sound, what our brains do with it, and also what this does to us.' It seems that 'Music does an exceptional job of engaging [the cognitive, motor, reward and sensory] systems, providing effective avenues for learning through sound.'

As is almost always the case in neuroscience books, there is too much text given over to labelling bits of the brain and describing their role. By the time I'm half way through these sections I've already forgotten what all those labels mean - science shouldn't be about learning labels. In at least one case, too, there is evidence of the author being too close to the subject - we are told about hair cells in ear, but it's not mentioned that they aren't actually hairs.

A particularly poor aspect of the book are the illustrations, which look like they belong in a self-published effort. Many of them fall into one or other of the two most common problems with DIY illustrations - they either don't add anything to the text or they are so small and/or murky that it's impossible to make out what it is that they are illustrating.

Overall, I repeatedly found it hard to find any solid meaning in the content of the book. When defining the sound mind, for example, Kraus comments 'I think the sound mind is a force behind a continuum from the past to the present and into the future.' That's alright, then. Time and again, this kind of vague waffly comment made me struggle to follow what was intended. I'm sure some will love it, but for me Of Sound Mind could have been better.

Hardback: 
Bookshop.org

  

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

It's On You - Nick Chater and George Loewenstein *****

Going on the cover you might think this was a political polemic - and admittedly there's an element of that - but the reason it's so good is quite different. It shows how behavioural economics and social psychology have led us astray by putting the focus way too much on individuals. A particular target is the concept of nudges which (as described in Brainjacking ) have been hugely over-rated. But overall the key problem ties to another psychological concept: framing. Huge kudos to both Nick Chater and George Loewenstein - a behavioural scientist and an economics and psychology professor - for having the guts to take on the flaws in their own earlier work and that of colleagues, because they make clear just how limited and potentially dangerous is the belief that individuals changing their behaviour can solve large-scale problems. The main thesis of the book is that there are two ways to approach the major problems we face - an 'i-frame' where we focus on the individual ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Introducing Artificial Intelligence – Henry Brighton & Howard Selina ****

It is almost impossible to rate these relentlessly hip books – they are pure marmite*. The huge  Introducing  … series (a vast range of books covering everything from Quantum Theory to Islam), previously known as …  for Beginners , puts across the message in a style that owes as much to Terry Gilliam and pop art as it does to popular science. Pretty well every page features large graphics with speech bubbles that are supposed to emphasise the point. Funnily,  Introducing Artificial Intelligence  is both a good and bad example of the series. Let’s get the bad bits out of the way first. The illustrators of these books are very variable, and I didn’t particularly like the pictures here. They did add something – the illustrations in these books always have a lot of information content, rather than being window dressing – but they seemed more detached from the text and rather lacking in the oomph the best versions have. The other real problem is that...
Post a Comment
Read more

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