What do you think?
Rate this book
ID: The Quest for Meaning in the 21st Century
If you've ever wondered what effect video games have on your children's minds or worried about how much private information the government and big companies know about you, ID is essential reading.
Professor Susan Greenfield argues persuasively that our individuality is under the microscope as never before; now more then ever we urgently need to look at what we want for ourselves as individuals and for our future society.
ID is an exploration of what it means to be human in a world of rapid change, a passionately argued wake-up call and an inspiring challenge to embrace creativity and forge our own identities.
Professor Susan Greenfield argues persuasively that our individuality is under the microscope as never before; now more then ever we urgently need to look at what we want for ourselves as individuals and for our future society.
ID is an exploration of what it means to be human in a world of rapid change, a passionately argued wake-up call and an inspiring challenge to embrace creativity and forge our own identities.
308 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 2008
11 people are currently reading
139 people want to read
About the author
Susan A. Greenfield
30 books83 followersGreenfield is Professor of Synaptic Pharmacology at Lincoln College, Oxford. On 1 February 2006, she was installed as Chancellor of Heriot-Watt University in Edinburgh. Until 8 January 2010, she was director of the Royal Institution of Great Britain
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 6 of 6 reviews
November 25, 2008
This is a highly speculative but very stimulating book. Greenfield draws on her neuroscientific background to argue that modern technology and the social changes it's driving are reshaping our brains and hence our identities as individual human beings.
She explores human identity through four over-arching personas, which she freely admits are caricatures: Someone, Anyone, Nobody, and Eureka. Very briefly, Someone is characterised by status and relations with others, Anyone by actions and prescribed patterns of living within a particular ideology, Nobody by an emphasis on sensation and raw feelings rather than cognition, and Eureka by creativity. These personas not only operate at the level of the individual, but also at the level of society, with history, particularly Western history, a struggle between Someone and Anyone, punctuated by brief periods of Eureka, such as 5th century Athens.
Greenfield argues that Someone offers individuality, Anyone fulfilment, Nobody neither fulfilment nor individuality, and only Eureka both fulfilment and individuality. However, the rapid development of info-, bio-, and nano-technologies in the 21st century are pushing identity towards the Nobody scenario because they "will have obliterated the traditional means of individual demarcation, from the familiar firewall of the physical body and brain to our notions of external 'reality', to third-party access to our innermost body processes, to homegenization of generations through homogenized health, appearance and reproductive potential, to a blurring of the daily narrative of work and leisure." The result will be a life of greater comfort and more fun, but less meaning.
Greenfield cites a range of fascinating ideas and research for her thesis. She doesn't argue that one persona (Eureka) is to be preferred, or that the other personas are bad, but that society has never had the understanding or tools to get the balance right at either the level of the individual or the level of society. Her theory is very speculative, and she doesn't quite pull it all together for me at the end, but what I liked about this book was the sense of a very smart person thinking aloud about society from a scientific perspective. Having just returned to normal society after six months of mostly solitary walking, I'm struggling to articulate the changes I've observed in myself, and a move away from Nobody towards a mix of Someone, Anyone, and Eureka is proving to be a very useful framework. Definitely going to reread this one.
She explores human identity through four over-arching personas, which she freely admits are caricatures: Someone, Anyone, Nobody, and Eureka. Very briefly, Someone is characterised by status and relations with others, Anyone by actions and prescribed patterns of living within a particular ideology, Nobody by an emphasis on sensation and raw feelings rather than cognition, and Eureka by creativity. These personas not only operate at the level of the individual, but also at the level of society, with history, particularly Western history, a struggle between Someone and Anyone, punctuated by brief periods of Eureka, such as 5th century Athens.
Greenfield argues that Someone offers individuality, Anyone fulfilment, Nobody neither fulfilment nor individuality, and only Eureka both fulfilment and individuality. However, the rapid development of info-, bio-, and nano-technologies in the 21st century are pushing identity towards the Nobody scenario because they "will have obliterated the traditional means of individual demarcation, from the familiar firewall of the physical body and brain to our notions of external 'reality', to third-party access to our innermost body processes, to homegenization of generations through homogenized health, appearance and reproductive potential, to a blurring of the daily narrative of work and leisure." The result will be a life of greater comfort and more fun, but less meaning.
Greenfield cites a range of fascinating ideas and research for her thesis. She doesn't argue that one persona (Eureka) is to be preferred, or that the other personas are bad, but that society has never had the understanding or tools to get the balance right at either the level of the individual or the level of society. Her theory is very speculative, and she doesn't quite pull it all together for me at the end, but what I liked about this book was the sense of a very smart person thinking aloud about society from a scientific perspective. Having just returned to normal society after six months of mostly solitary walking, I'm struggling to articulate the changes I've observed in myself, and a move away from Nobody towards a mix of Someone, Anyone, and Eureka is proving to be a very useful framework. Definitely going to reread this one.
November 17, 2010
This book explores the various known effects of screen experiences on the brain, and their possible (caricatured) outcomes. Most satisfyingly, in the final chapter Greenfield actually offers a series of ideas on how we might best turn this mental progression towards a good end, rather than some of the negative scenarios explored earlier.
She does point out, of course, that this might tempt some to go down the Brave New World path, but is also reassured that as there is no one place in the brain that is entirely responsible for creating our consciousness we do not have to worry about high-level mind manipulation just yet.
I like the way this book frames itself. It is likely to draw concerned adults in from its promises of examining the effects modern technology may be having on the brains of the younger generations, but then it also equips them with a tool-set on how to analyse the benefits and long-term effects of this interaction as well. Greenfield does not scare-monger; she examines her subject critically and thoroughly (although this easily could have been five books as there is still a lot of elements still waiting to be explored).
I am excited about the 'post-human' future, and that is precisely why I am excited about this book. We've had our fill of futuristic idealism, and as we grow ever closer to the machines we build, we need to look at the reality of what this means for humanity as a whole. We need to examine critically the path we are taking - not to stop walking it, but to make sure we are well-equipped to handle and shape the outcomes.
I love neuroscience, microbiology, psychology, philosophy and technology. This book was a feast. It has left me with many questions I wish to pursue. I'd love to do research in this field. This has definitely been a great introduction to an exciting area of study.
She does point out, of course, that this might tempt some to go down the Brave New World path, but is also reassured that as there is no one place in the brain that is entirely responsible for creating our consciousness we do not have to worry about high-level mind manipulation just yet.
I like the way this book frames itself. It is likely to draw concerned adults in from its promises of examining the effects modern technology may be having on the brains of the younger generations, but then it also equips them with a tool-set on how to analyse the benefits and long-term effects of this interaction as well. Greenfield does not scare-monger; she examines her subject critically and thoroughly (although this easily could have been five books as there is still a lot of elements still waiting to be explored).
I am excited about the 'post-human' future, and that is precisely why I am excited about this book. We've had our fill of futuristic idealism, and as we grow ever closer to the machines we build, we need to look at the reality of what this means for humanity as a whole. We need to examine critically the path we are taking - not to stop walking it, but to make sure we are well-equipped to handle and shape the outcomes.
I love neuroscience, microbiology, psychology, philosophy and technology. This book was a feast. It has left me with many questions I wish to pursue. I'd love to do research in this field. This has definitely been a great introduction to an exciting area of study.
July 5, 2009
The dark side of neuroplasticity and the rise of screen culture.
January 22, 2023
I am a novice. I do not have a medical background but this book was gripping. The clarity of thought, the search for answers and the beautifully written conclusion (often confirming what we know and don’t yet know) made this a very enjoyable read. Try it.
November 25, 2013
Greenfield poses an important question in the premiss of her book, namely, what effect will new technology have on the physical competition of the brain for future generations but for me, she fails to place the question in relation to the reality of a sociological reality.
Some of her generalisations about conditions such as schizophrenia are overly simplistic and sweeping (no one with schizophrenia can understand metaphor - untrue) etc and her premies that future generations would definitely fall into the extremes of behavioural types is so flawed as to make the arguments pointless.
There were some interesting explanations of neuroscience which were helpful for the non neurologist, but that's about the most complimentary thing I can say about the book.
Biggest bugbear was her repetitive restatement that there are no parts of the brain uniquely devoted to particular tasks, while at the same time referring to a multitude of examples that seemed to say just that.
Some of her generalisations about conditions such as schizophrenia are overly simplistic and sweeping (no one with schizophrenia can understand metaphor - untrue) etc and her premies that future generations would definitely fall into the extremes of behavioural types is so flawed as to make the arguments pointless.
There were some interesting explanations of neuroscience which were helpful for the non neurologist, but that's about the most complimentary thing I can say about the book.
Biggest bugbear was her repetitive restatement that there are no parts of the brain uniquely devoted to particular tasks, while at the same time referring to a multitude of examples that seemed to say just that.
February 5, 2012
It's a mind boggling book; i can feel my "grey cells" move and feel new connections being made. So worth reading if not a must read, especially for parents!
At times surely not easy - we're talking neuroscience after all, but the issue that Susan Greenfield discusses is so relevant to today's (or should I say tomorrow's society), it is seriously necessary to think about it in different ways.
At times surely not easy - we're talking neuroscience after all, but the issue that Susan Greenfield discusses is so relevant to today's (or should I say tomorrow's society), it is seriously necessary to think about it in different ways.
Displaying 1 - 6 of 6 reviews