What do you think?
Rate this book
Neuro: The New Brain Sciences and the Management of the Mind
The brain sciences are influencing our understanding of human behavior as never before, from neuropsychiatry and neuroeconomics to neurotheology and neuroaesthetics. Many now believe that the brain is what makes us human, and it seems that neuroscientists are poised to become the new experts in the management of human conduct. "Neuro" describes the key developments--theoretical, technological, economic, and biopolitical--that have enabled the neurosciences to gain such traction outside the laboratory. It explores the ways neurobiological conceptions of personhood are influencing everything from child rearing to criminal justice, and are transforming the ways we "know ourselves" as human beings. In this emerging neuro-ontology, we are not "determined" by our neurobiology: on the contrary, it appears that we can and should seek to improve ourselves by understanding and acting on our brains.
"Neuro" examines the implications of this emerging trend, weighing the promises against the perils, and evaluating some widely held concerns about a neurobiological "colonization" of the social and human sciences. Despite identifying many exaggerated claims and premature promises, "Neuro" argues that the openness provided by the new styles of thought taking shape in neuroscience, with its contemporary conceptions of the neuromolecular, plastic, and social brain, could make possible a new and productive engagement between the social and brain sciences.
Copyright note: Reproduction, including downloading of Joan Miro works is prohibited by copyright laws and international conventions without the express written permission of Artists Rights Society (ARS), New York.
"Neuro" examines the implications of this emerging trend, weighing the promises against the perils, and evaluating some widely held concerns about a neurobiological "colonization" of the social and human sciences. Despite identifying many exaggerated claims and premature promises, "Neuro" argues that the openness provided by the new styles of thought taking shape in neuroscience, with its contemporary conceptions of the neuromolecular, plastic, and social brain, could make possible a new and productive engagement between the social and brain sciences.
Copyright note: Reproduction, including downloading of Joan Miro works is prohibited by copyright laws and international conventions without the express written permission of Artists Rights Society (ARS), New York.
431 pages, ebook
First published January 1, 2013
25 people are currently reading
363 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 7 of 7 reviews
July 15, 2020
Interesting read, but more historical than analytical, more chronological than logical, no in-depth examination of raised issues.
Edit: what I meant is, it's a good book if you want to learn about neuro issues for fun; I couldn't use it for work.
Edit: what I meant is, it's a good book if you want to learn about neuro issues for fun; I couldn't use it for work.
September 26, 2015
Mind Over Matter: Raising ‘Brain Awareness’
Neuro is a highly enlightening and intriguing read as it highlights significant dichotomies in the context of social and human sciences by distinguishing between opposing views and conflicting approaches such as the mind and brain, the reductionist versus the holistic approach, the biophysical versus the chemical, plasticity versus reductionism, normality and pathology, the self as a neuron of networks versus the self as a transcendent of the biophysical, the use of models in laboratory settings and their translation into real world accounts, and other emerging issues. The authors carefully weigh the methodological over the technical as they combine historical studies from the social and human sciences.
The overarching question that resonated with me is the great divide between the mind and brain: Does the divide really exist and if so, how mutually exclusive are they from one another? It is admittedly unnerving how the overall human existence is, in a sense, reduced to a bundle of nerves, neurons, and synapses, but that is merely one approach after all. On the other hand, the plasticity approach presents the brain as an ever-changing infrastructure that adjusts in response to external experiences and environmental input. This information both clarifies and terrifies as it repeatedly asserts the importance of the choices we make, especially during particular stages like parenthood where the consequences could be passed down the generations.
What is also disturbing, other than the accounts of the visual documentation of asylum inmates and the minds of criminals, (59) is to think about the consequences of intervening into the faculties of the brain with more than just psychiatric drugs. What could that entail? This is where the undertaking seems to shift from reality to one with science fiction undertones. We are informed that the brain is both there and not there, an uncanny realization, which the Matrix assertively projects.
I think that the arguments made and questions posed in this book (i.e. the weaknesses of current tests and setups, the role of environmental input and a person’s individual experiences on mental health, the issue of diagnosing and discerning between pathology and normality, and the boundaries of madness and sanity) aim to inform us of our social brains so that we become more “reflexively aware” (161).
This book informs and raises awareness of issues that were once, and perhaps still are, stigmatizing such as mental health as well as the importance of early intervention in both the public and private spheres of our lives. Moreover, it offers a glimpse into future prospects, albeit conflicting, like bioprediction (screening) or the more accessible approach of educating the masses of how to self-assess and take precautionary measures that can ultimately prevent the degradation of mental health. It’s initially perplexing to think how little knowledge we have of our own consciousness and the doings of our mind and brain. However, books and research like this incite and instill hope that perhaps one day, maybe not long from now, we will be able to treat mental health and the notion of the brain and mind not just via the diverging diagnoses or dichotomies but rather through a homogenic scope under the merging domains of the social, historical, and cultural processes. The takeaway for me was that regardless of the distinct approaches and definitions, we are the ones that choose to be “susceptible or resilient to environmental insults” (188). After all, it is up to us to “shape our brains as they shape us” (163). And shape we must.
Neuro is a highly enlightening and intriguing read as it highlights significant dichotomies in the context of social and human sciences by distinguishing between opposing views and conflicting approaches such as the mind and brain, the reductionist versus the holistic approach, the biophysical versus the chemical, plasticity versus reductionism, normality and pathology, the self as a neuron of networks versus the self as a transcendent of the biophysical, the use of models in laboratory settings and their translation into real world accounts, and other emerging issues. The authors carefully weigh the methodological over the technical as they combine historical studies from the social and human sciences.
The overarching question that resonated with me is the great divide between the mind and brain: Does the divide really exist and if so, how mutually exclusive are they from one another? It is admittedly unnerving how the overall human existence is, in a sense, reduced to a bundle of nerves, neurons, and synapses, but that is merely one approach after all. On the other hand, the plasticity approach presents the brain as an ever-changing infrastructure that adjusts in response to external experiences and environmental input. This information both clarifies and terrifies as it repeatedly asserts the importance of the choices we make, especially during particular stages like parenthood where the consequences could be passed down the generations.
What is also disturbing, other than the accounts of the visual documentation of asylum inmates and the minds of criminals, (59) is to think about the consequences of intervening into the faculties of the brain with more than just psychiatric drugs. What could that entail? This is where the undertaking seems to shift from reality to one with science fiction undertones. We are informed that the brain is both there and not there, an uncanny realization, which the Matrix assertively projects.
I think that the arguments made and questions posed in this book (i.e. the weaknesses of current tests and setups, the role of environmental input and a person’s individual experiences on mental health, the issue of diagnosing and discerning between pathology and normality, and the boundaries of madness and sanity) aim to inform us of our social brains so that we become more “reflexively aware” (161).
This book informs and raises awareness of issues that were once, and perhaps still are, stigmatizing such as mental health as well as the importance of early intervention in both the public and private spheres of our lives. Moreover, it offers a glimpse into future prospects, albeit conflicting, like bioprediction (screening) or the more accessible approach of educating the masses of how to self-assess and take precautionary measures that can ultimately prevent the degradation of mental health. It’s initially perplexing to think how little knowledge we have of our own consciousness and the doings of our mind and brain. However, books and research like this incite and instill hope that perhaps one day, maybe not long from now, we will be able to treat mental health and the notion of the brain and mind not just via the diverging diagnoses or dichotomies but rather through a homogenic scope under the merging domains of the social, historical, and cultural processes. The takeaway for me was that regardless of the distinct approaches and definitions, we are the ones that choose to be “susceptible or resilient to environmental insults” (188). After all, it is up to us to “shape our brains as they shape us” (163). And shape we must.
June 19, 2014
Neuro looks at the development of the neurosciences historically. Rose and Abi-Rached [co-author in the edition that I read] stress that a number of technological and conceptual developments in recent years have changed not simply what we know about the brain, but the 'style' with which we think about the brain and its relationship to our personhood. New technologies of visualization [pet scan, fmri] offer the idea that the nervous system is plastic, that is capable of change and growth have led to technologies for changing brains. They have also led to a self-help industry focused on brains, 'neurobics.' They suggest that while much has changed, not much has changed. Essentially they argue that the psy disciplines have been re-outfitted as 'neuro' without much being added to our understanding of what matters in human life. While they do take science seriously they offer a wise warning against hype.
April 9, 2020
I found this book to be a real mixed bag. To the good, it lucidly explores a wide range of developments in neuroscience and wider discourses around them to make a compelling case that there is an emergent "neuro" approach that is shaping social policy and what it means to be human. To the bad, it fails to explore some important questions raised throughout, especially about context, and does not fairly acknowledge obvious objections to some of its claims. One of its main arguments is I think essentially a straw-man argument about social science critics of the neurosciences. Ultimately I think the book is less than the sum of its parts - though some of those parts are excellent.
April 4, 2013
I picked this book up out of my interested in Neuroscience and my career path pointing at it.
The book did an incredible job of explaining categories of the Neuro world and it made headway on ideas and concepts.
Although the read was quite informative, it was also heavy and somewhat dry at times.
The book did an incredible job of explaining categories of the Neuro world and it made headway on ideas and concepts.
Although the read was quite informative, it was also heavy and somewhat dry at times.
May 30, 2013
Has the odd flash of insight, but mostly it's a sociologically-inflected history of science.
October 27, 2017
The history of neuro sciences and the implications for culture society and health care
Academic book and in the limit of densely written and easy reading for non specialists in the topic. The authors have done a great job of creating a book that can be read for good readers of scientific divulgation books, but trying to be as more accurate and documented like in any academic book.
It is a good view from people that are not in the neuro field, however they know and researched deeply about the topic. I liked the historical perspective and how they narrate the changes in perception that we have of ourselves. As a surprise it came to me to realize how modern the neuro sciences are, and the ,ore surprising to read that the concept that the mind is a product (or produced) by the brain is more recent! I would have thought that the classic Greeks already figured it out.
From two scholars that are not American it is very good to have another perspective, which culturally and socially is closer to social European and Mediterranean style. Also it gives a good understanding on how the DSM manual has been created and evolved, and a good warning to take with a pint of salt any news press on "latest scan study of the brain proves that...." fill in with whatever outrageous claim you want to put there. The book shows also that including the most die hard scientists on we are only a brain, have a balanced perspective of what we are, something that it is missed on those careless reports.
Academic book and in the limit of densely written and easy reading for non specialists in the topic. The authors have done a great job of creating a book that can be read for good readers of scientific divulgation books, but trying to be as more accurate and documented like in any academic book.
It is a good view from people that are not in the neuro field, however they know and researched deeply about the topic. I liked the historical perspective and how they narrate the changes in perception that we have of ourselves. As a surprise it came to me to realize how modern the neuro sciences are, and the ,ore surprising to read that the concept that the mind is a product (or produced) by the brain is more recent! I would have thought that the classic Greeks already figured it out.
From two scholars that are not American it is very good to have another perspective, which culturally and socially is closer to social European and Mediterranean style. Also it gives a good understanding on how the DSM manual has been created and evolved, and a good warning to take with a pint of salt any news press on "latest scan study of the brain proves that...." fill in with whatever outrageous claim you want to put there. The book shows also that including the most die hard scientists on we are only a brain, have a balanced perspective of what we are, something that it is missed on those careless reports.
Displaying 1 - 7 of 7 reviews