What do you think?
Rate this book
Mind as Machine: A History of Cognitive Science Two-Volume Set
The development of cognitive science is one of the most remarkable and fascinating intellectual achievements of the modern era. It brings together psychology, neuroscience, artificial intelligence, computing, philosophy, linguistics, and anthropology in the project of understanding the mind by modelling its workings. Oxford University Press now presents a masterful history of cognitive science, told by one of its most eminent practitioners.
1712 pages, Hardcover
First published August 31, 2006
9 people are currently reading
367 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 - 5 of 5 reviews
April 2, 2014
Probably the most comprehensive thing ever written on the history of cognitive science. But Boden promises much more than a dry history here. This set is actually the breathtaking story of the humankind walking towards artificial intelligence via language, philosophy and ethics. And lastly, the language of the book is far from an academic text making it easy to read without sacrificing the intellectual depth. Chomsky fans can be a little offended when they read the section an linguistics, though:)
May 7, 2022
It's a difficult book to review, simply due to its size and ambition. No wonder Man as Machine has been hailed as Margaret Boden's magnum opus, serving as probably the richest history of the cognitive sciences. The range of the themes discussed is just bedazzling. Anyone who comes across this work will surely discover new things — or, at the least, come to appreciate how lively and diverse the field of cognitive sciences is. And the author's wide reading, bold and frank judgements only add value.
However — the good writing and lovely little anecdotes apart — this two-volume work suffers from three major issues:
First, given its length and structure, the work is neither suited for cover-to-cover reading, nor can it be readily consulted as a reference work. There are large chapters or sections that may not be of your interest. Many terms are used, only to be explained a few pages or chapters (!) down the line. All this makes the author's recommendation to 'begin at the beginning and and go on till you end' rather unreliable. This is why the ideal reader would be thick skinned enough to just bulldoze their way through the book, ignoring anything you don't understand on the first go.
Second, there are far too many cross-references. Boden's purpose was pointing out interesting historical connections. But their sheer number can break the flow and put off any reader. And, unless you're using a digital version with hyperlinks, they're more or less useless. The larger criticism here is that it's a lazy (sorry!) manner of pointing out connections or historical influences: to simply drop names or have someone sweat over the endless cross-referencing. Instead, in order to argue genuine casual connections or historical trends, a historian must do the additional work and make a solid case. They must present arguments in the form of chapter names, newly identified historical processes, illustrative timelines, etc. Besides, without such scaffolding, a student can wade through this tome and feel dizzy and proud at the end, but with no better grasp of issues. (Although, maybe it's just my short attention span? Or maybe scholarly works cannot be expected to adopt a textbook-style, offering mnemonic aids or recap sections on every page? )
Third, there is too little scientific detail. I feel that some experimental detail is necessary to point out intellectual trends and connections; an entire history of a field cannot be written relying only on the 'Discussion' section of various papers. Instead, fleshing out the experimental paradigm, methods, and empirical data is key to a convincing (and reliable!) history. Else, it’s all in the air…e.g., no clear description of the methods in cognitive neuroscience, and their origins, functioning, flaws, and main findings.
However, no work is perfect. If anything, in spite of these flaws, Man as Machine is probably the best current history of cognitive sciences. I also think this work would help prompt more work and historiography for the beautiful discipline that cognitive sciences are.
© Creative Commons CC BY-NC 4.0
However — the good writing and lovely little anecdotes apart — this two-volume work suffers from three major issues:
First, given its length and structure, the work is neither suited for cover-to-cover reading, nor can it be readily consulted as a reference work. There are large chapters or sections that may not be of your interest. Many terms are used, only to be explained a few pages or chapters (!) down the line. All this makes the author's recommendation to 'begin at the beginning and and go on till you end' rather unreliable. This is why the ideal reader would be thick skinned enough to just bulldoze their way through the book, ignoring anything you don't understand on the first go.
Second, there are far too many cross-references. Boden's purpose was pointing out interesting historical connections. But their sheer number can break the flow and put off any reader. And, unless you're using a digital version with hyperlinks, they're more or less useless. The larger criticism here is that it's a lazy (sorry!) manner of pointing out connections or historical influences: to simply drop names or have someone sweat over the endless cross-referencing. Instead, in order to argue genuine casual connections or historical trends, a historian must do the additional work and make a solid case. They must present arguments in the form of chapter names, newly identified historical processes, illustrative timelines, etc. Besides, without such scaffolding, a student can wade through this tome and feel dizzy and proud at the end, but with no better grasp of issues. (Although, maybe it's just my short attention span? Or maybe scholarly works cannot be expected to adopt a textbook-style, offering mnemonic aids or recap sections on every page? )
Third, there is too little scientific detail. I feel that some experimental detail is necessary to point out intellectual trends and connections; an entire history of a field cannot be written relying only on the 'Discussion' section of various papers. Instead, fleshing out the experimental paradigm, methods, and empirical data is key to a convincing (and reliable!) history. Else, it’s all in the air…e.g., no clear description of the methods in cognitive neuroscience, and their origins, functioning, flaws, and main findings.
However, no work is perfect. If anything, in spite of these flaws, Man as Machine is probably the best current history of cognitive sciences. I also think this work would help prompt more work and historiography for the beautiful discipline that cognitive sciences are.
© Creative Commons CC BY-NC 4.0
May 10, 2020
A wonderful reference on the history of cognitive science to which I always go back to when some trendy research topics make the field feel strange and confused.
November 30, 2008
Every pages sends me back to the library ....
August 23, 2010
an excellent book! the main meal is an overview of the topic, with an enjoyable put-down of Chomsky as dessert!
Displaying 1 - 5 of 5 reviews