What do you think?
Rate this book
Total man
Brand New. In Stock. Minor shelf wear but in good condition.
- GenresPsychologyNonfiction
552 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 1973
18 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 - 2 of 2 reviews
May 25, 2021
I started this last year as "one of the books I've had in its original edition since 1977" challenge, and it has been a slow old read. I remember thinking it was very interesting back in 1977 - but this time it has been most dull. And long! Nearly 600 pages, and could easily have been much (much) shorter.
Back in 1977, this would have been one of my first introductions to an awful lot of psychology, and also it was full of notions that seemed novel and interesting: "The Divided Self" instantiated in brain structures and through them in culture, left hand and right hand, female and male, psychotic and neurotic, conscious and subconcious; a lot of polarities compared (with any fuzzy bits pruned)..
But reading it this time, in a less innocent and more critical mode, I couldn't help noticing quite how ridiculously speculative it all is, with lots of "if this is the case", "if we were to suppose", "if we can conclude". If you ignore the hypotheticals and just focus on the "facts" after the hypotheticals, it can all seem quite plausible, but the long chain of inferences seems a little weak to carry the bridge across the Gulf of Possible Nonsense.
As to the hypothetical nature of the arguments, you will find (opening the book at random) chains of sentences like this: "This is probably a serious misconception"... "was probably after all first on the scene".... "Is it not far more likely"... "This is perhaps yet one of the further meanings"... "To generalise at this point"... "This claim is somewhat borne out"... "the difference may be perceived" "For reasons ...by no means entirely clear"... "the possible exceptions to this statement"... "one has suggested..." Webs of speculation feed into mazes of conjecture that terminate in knots of problematic conclusions. Because the conclusions rest upon so many interlinked hypotheticals, I found myself asking, "but what if it isn't likely, or probable, or not borne out at all", and so on.
The book is also structured in a way that hinders reading. Footnotes abound, but these are often additional speculations or clarifications associated with points just made. Many, many of these could have been added within the flow of the text, and in some cases might have helped the argument. As it was, I found myself breaking the flow of reading to jump to another point, and then having to regain my rhythm. Additionally, almost out of the blue, after describing Systems A and B, their polarities, their links, arrives System C. This kind of makes sense - a synthesis of the thesis and antithesis of A and B. But there has been little to prepare the reader for this kind of synthesis although, of course, it explains the Total Man of the title. Yet, one also feels that this is also a way to marry his theories with other world views involving trinities, which couldn't be ignored if you were using culture, religion and literature as evidence.
The book also became vehicle for other pet theories or Gooch's that appeared in later books. One is tempted to think that he wanted to get these ideas out in some form in case he never got another book deal. For example, there is a very (very) long section on the differences and conflicts between Neanderthals and Cro-Magnons that takes up nearly eighty pages, and yet by the end of it I had lost the thread of Gooch's argument. This conflict was to become the subject of his "The Neanderthal Question" (and other later books). Similarly, there's a short (and, again, confusing) section on probability and chance (when discussing the I Ching) that he expanded in his "The Paranormal" to even more confusing effect.
The book isn't entirely without merit, and introduced me, 40 years ago, when I was young and not so widely-read, to a lot of topics and notions of which I had little awareness. But it is a slog, and it is not well-structured, so prepare yourself well for the long knitting session involved in handling the skein of supposition.
Back in 1977, this would have been one of my first introductions to an awful lot of psychology, and also it was full of notions that seemed novel and interesting: "The Divided Self" instantiated in brain structures and through them in culture, left hand and right hand, female and male, psychotic and neurotic, conscious and subconcious; a lot of polarities compared (with any fuzzy bits pruned)..
But reading it this time, in a less innocent and more critical mode, I couldn't help noticing quite how ridiculously speculative it all is, with lots of "if this is the case", "if we were to suppose", "if we can conclude". If you ignore the hypotheticals and just focus on the "facts" after the hypotheticals, it can all seem quite plausible, but the long chain of inferences seems a little weak to carry the bridge across the Gulf of Possible Nonsense.
As to the hypothetical nature of the arguments, you will find (opening the book at random) chains of sentences like this: "This is probably a serious misconception"... "was probably after all first on the scene".... "Is it not far more likely"... "This is perhaps yet one of the further meanings"... "To generalise at this point"... "This claim is somewhat borne out"... "the difference may be perceived" "For reasons ...by no means entirely clear"... "the possible exceptions to this statement"... "one has suggested..." Webs of speculation feed into mazes of conjecture that terminate in knots of problematic conclusions. Because the conclusions rest upon so many interlinked hypotheticals, I found myself asking, "but what if it isn't likely, or probable, or not borne out at all", and so on.
The book is also structured in a way that hinders reading. Footnotes abound, but these are often additional speculations or clarifications associated with points just made. Many, many of these could have been added within the flow of the text, and in some cases might have helped the argument. As it was, I found myself breaking the flow of reading to jump to another point, and then having to regain my rhythm. Additionally, almost out of the blue, after describing Systems A and B, their polarities, their links, arrives System C. This kind of makes sense - a synthesis of the thesis and antithesis of A and B. But there has been little to prepare the reader for this kind of synthesis although, of course, it explains the Total Man of the title. Yet, one also feels that this is also a way to marry his theories with other world views involving trinities, which couldn't be ignored if you were using culture, religion and literature as evidence.
The book also became vehicle for other pet theories or Gooch's that appeared in later books. One is tempted to think that he wanted to get these ideas out in some form in case he never got another book deal. For example, there is a very (very) long section on the differences and conflicts between Neanderthals and Cro-Magnons that takes up nearly eighty pages, and yet by the end of it I had lost the thread of Gooch's argument. This conflict was to become the subject of his "The Neanderthal Question" (and other later books). Similarly, there's a short (and, again, confusing) section on probability and chance (when discussing the I Ching) that he expanded in his "The Paranormal" to even more confusing effect.
The book isn't entirely without merit, and introduced me, 40 years ago, when I was young and not so widely-read, to a lot of topics and notions of which I had little awareness. But it is a slog, and it is not well-structured, so prepare yourself well for the long knitting session involved in handling the skein of supposition.
December 19, 2024
Mr. Gooch has really outdone himself. His writing a beacon for post-modern psychology, his diagrams explaining the intersection of personality, ego, consciousness, duality, religion, and more provide a unique and incredibly intelligent theory on why we are the way we are. 10/10, thank you Mr. Gooch.
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews