What do you think?
Rate this book
The Future of the Brain: The Promise & Perils of Tomorrow's Neuroscience
Brain repair, smart pills, mind-reading machines--modern neuroscience promises to soon deliver a remarkable array of wonders as well as profound insight into the nature of the brain. But these exciting new breakthroughs, warns Steven Rose, will also raise troubling questions about what it means to be human.
In The Future of the Brain, Rose explores just how far neuroscience may help us understand the human brain--including consciousness--and to what extent cutting edge technologies should have the power to mend or manipulate the mind. Rose first offers a panoramic look at what we now know about the brain, from its three-billion-year evolution, to its astonishingly rapid development in the embryo, to the miraculous process of infant development. More important, he shows what all this science can--and cannot--tell us about the human condition. He examines questions that still baffle scientists and he explores the potential threats and promises of new technologies and their ethical, legal, and social implications, wondering how far we should go in eliminating unwanted behavior or enhancing desired characteristics, focusing on the new "brain steroids" and on the use of Ritalin to control young children.
The Future of the Brain is a remarkable look at what the brain sciences are telling us about who we are and where we came from--and where we may be headed in years to come.
In The Future of the Brain, Rose explores just how far neuroscience may help us understand the human brain--including consciousness--and to what extent cutting edge technologies should have the power to mend or manipulate the mind. Rose first offers a panoramic look at what we now know about the brain, from its three-billion-year evolution, to its astonishingly rapid development in the embryo, to the miraculous process of infant development. More important, he shows what all this science can--and cannot--tell us about the human condition. He examines questions that still baffle scientists and he explores the potential threats and promises of new technologies and their ethical, legal, and social implications, wondering how far we should go in eliminating unwanted behavior or enhancing desired characteristics, focusing on the new "brain steroids" and on the use of Ritalin to control young children.
The Future of the Brain is a remarkable look at what the brain sciences are telling us about who we are and where we came from--and where we may be headed in years to come.
352 pages, Paperback
First published April 1, 2005
11 people are currently reading
327 people want to read
About the author
Steven Rose
43 books30 followersSteven Peter Russell Rose was an English neuroscientist, author and social commentator. He was an emeritus professor of biology and neurobiology at the Open University and Gresham College, London.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 10 of 10 reviews
August 27, 2019
How neuroscience will and will not change our lives
The Future of the Brain is about how neurotechnology derived from neuroscience will attempt to change our brains, about what we can and cannot expect from science, and what we should fear. Rose is a brain scientist whose specialty is in the neuroscience of memory.
He is also a prolific writer on evolutionary biology. He is a proactive opponent of a strictly reductionist stance in biology and a stern critic of what he sees as a genocentric approach to psychology and what it means to be human. Some of his books (most notably Not in Our Genes (1984) written with Richard Lewontin and Leo Kamini, and Alas, Poor Darwin: Arguments Against Evolutionary Psychology (2000) which he edited with Hilary Rose) are more about the politics of evolutionary biology than about the science; but here Rose keeps his political views mostly in the background. The result is an informative book that helps us to understand what science is learning about how the brain works and about how it can be affected by outside agents.
After an introductory chapter he begins with the nitty-gritty of how the brain came to be and how it might be understood--from proto-cells in the pre-biotic soup to axons, dendrites, synapses and brain "structures." His theme throughout is that the brain cannot be understood except as a process continually in motion. He argues that how our brains developed cannot be appreciated through an isolated study of the genetic blueprint. Instead we must look to the brain's developmental history in interaction with the environment to determine what it is and how it works and why.
The middle chapters move from the brain to the mind, from the nuts and bolts of neurology to the experiential human being living in an environment in part created by itself. Rose touches on the "mystery" of consciousness and the paradox of free will. He finishes with some conjectures about what kinds of pharmaceutical agents are to come, what kinds of invasive procedures might be employed in attempts to combat various diseases or to cope with the effects of ageing or to help make us "better than normal." The final chapter is on "Ethics in a Neurocentric World."
Although Rose does not spell out how the mind differs from the brain--I take it he presumes a dictionary definition--much of the book is concerned with the distinction. The brain is the flesh and blood; the mind is the experience, is how I read him. I want to add that the distinction between brain and mind can be seen as similar to the distinction between sex and gender. Sex is biology. Gender is the cultural expression of that biology.
He objects to viewing the brain as composed of "modules" directed by genetic imperatives. He writes that "...life is not a static 'thing' but a process" (p. 62) We are forever changing. The Steven Rose of 30 is not the same as the Steven Rose of today. He is a different person because of what has happened to him during the ensuing decades, and how he has reacted to what has happened, and what he has learned. And if Steven Rose were somehow cloned, that Steven Rose would be different still because of the different environments--pre-natal and afterward--in which he would grow.
He speaks of "patterns of activity" in the working brain. He doesn't like the use of "modules" such as a supposed "reading module" or "reading instinct." (p. 134) However it is really impossible to write about something as foreign to our everyday experience as the workings of the brain without resorting to metaphor and analogy. Something is like something else. Something is compared to something else. This is how we learn. So instead of modules, Rose employs variously, "a collection of mini-organs" (p. 149); "brain regions" (p. 157); "brain...structures" (p. 133), etc. In fact he uses the term "modules" himself on, for example, pages 149, 156, 158. Furthermore his railing against the use of our experience in the "Environment of Evolutionary Adaptation" during the Pleistocene by evolutionary psychologists is partially contradicted by his acknowledgment that we are indeed shaped by our environment as we in turn shape it. It is clear to me that where Rose and the evolutionary psychologists differ is in their perception of how much the environments since the Pleistocene have changed us. Steven Pinker, Edward O. Wilson and others think "not all that much," while Rose thinks "a whole lot." The truth, one can imagine, lies somewhere in between.
It should be noted that one of the unsolved problems in evolution is knowing how fast evolutionary change can take place. Stephen Jay Gould spoke of rapid change after long periods of stasis while others have disagreed; but no one can say how much we have changed biologically since the Pleistocene. It is known that large populations are strongly resistant to evolutionary change because mutations quickly get swamped in the huge genetic pool. My feeling is that in populations as large as ours, little evolutionary change is taking place. The environment is constantly changing, but the selective pressure usually brought about through starvation, disease, and competition from other species is really not much in evidence. And so I tend to side with those who believe we haven't changed all that much.
Steven Rose is a wise and caring man who sometimes forgets his manners when speaking about those with whom he has sharp disagreements. But in this book he is at his best and most well-behaved. Let me finish with perhaps the wisest of his observations. He is speaking of the increased "powers of surveillance and coercion available to an authoritarian state." He warns, "The neurotechnologies [now available and to come] will add to these powers, but the real issue is probably not so much how to curb the technologies, but how to control the state." (p. 302)
--Dennis Littrell, author of “Understanding Evolution and Ourselves”
The Future of the Brain is about how neurotechnology derived from neuroscience will attempt to change our brains, about what we can and cannot expect from science, and what we should fear. Rose is a brain scientist whose specialty is in the neuroscience of memory.
He is also a prolific writer on evolutionary biology. He is a proactive opponent of a strictly reductionist stance in biology and a stern critic of what he sees as a genocentric approach to psychology and what it means to be human. Some of his books (most notably Not in Our Genes (1984) written with Richard Lewontin and Leo Kamini, and Alas, Poor Darwin: Arguments Against Evolutionary Psychology (2000) which he edited with Hilary Rose) are more about the politics of evolutionary biology than about the science; but here Rose keeps his political views mostly in the background. The result is an informative book that helps us to understand what science is learning about how the brain works and about how it can be affected by outside agents.
After an introductory chapter he begins with the nitty-gritty of how the brain came to be and how it might be understood--from proto-cells in the pre-biotic soup to axons, dendrites, synapses and brain "structures." His theme throughout is that the brain cannot be understood except as a process continually in motion. He argues that how our brains developed cannot be appreciated through an isolated study of the genetic blueprint. Instead we must look to the brain's developmental history in interaction with the environment to determine what it is and how it works and why.
The middle chapters move from the brain to the mind, from the nuts and bolts of neurology to the experiential human being living in an environment in part created by itself. Rose touches on the "mystery" of consciousness and the paradox of free will. He finishes with some conjectures about what kinds of pharmaceutical agents are to come, what kinds of invasive procedures might be employed in attempts to combat various diseases or to cope with the effects of ageing or to help make us "better than normal." The final chapter is on "Ethics in a Neurocentric World."
Although Rose does not spell out how the mind differs from the brain--I take it he presumes a dictionary definition--much of the book is concerned with the distinction. The brain is the flesh and blood; the mind is the experience, is how I read him. I want to add that the distinction between brain and mind can be seen as similar to the distinction between sex and gender. Sex is biology. Gender is the cultural expression of that biology.
He objects to viewing the brain as composed of "modules" directed by genetic imperatives. He writes that "...life is not a static 'thing' but a process" (p. 62) We are forever changing. The Steven Rose of 30 is not the same as the Steven Rose of today. He is a different person because of what has happened to him during the ensuing decades, and how he has reacted to what has happened, and what he has learned. And if Steven Rose were somehow cloned, that Steven Rose would be different still because of the different environments--pre-natal and afterward--in which he would grow.
He speaks of "patterns of activity" in the working brain. He doesn't like the use of "modules" such as a supposed "reading module" or "reading instinct." (p. 134) However it is really impossible to write about something as foreign to our everyday experience as the workings of the brain without resorting to metaphor and analogy. Something is like something else. Something is compared to something else. This is how we learn. So instead of modules, Rose employs variously, "a collection of mini-organs" (p. 149); "brain regions" (p. 157); "brain...structures" (p. 133), etc. In fact he uses the term "modules" himself on, for example, pages 149, 156, 158. Furthermore his railing against the use of our experience in the "Environment of Evolutionary Adaptation" during the Pleistocene by evolutionary psychologists is partially contradicted by his acknowledgment that we are indeed shaped by our environment as we in turn shape it. It is clear to me that where Rose and the evolutionary psychologists differ is in their perception of how much the environments since the Pleistocene have changed us. Steven Pinker, Edward O. Wilson and others think "not all that much," while Rose thinks "a whole lot." The truth, one can imagine, lies somewhere in between.
It should be noted that one of the unsolved problems in evolution is knowing how fast evolutionary change can take place. Stephen Jay Gould spoke of rapid change after long periods of stasis while others have disagreed; but no one can say how much we have changed biologically since the Pleistocene. It is known that large populations are strongly resistant to evolutionary change because mutations quickly get swamped in the huge genetic pool. My feeling is that in populations as large as ours, little evolutionary change is taking place. The environment is constantly changing, but the selective pressure usually brought about through starvation, disease, and competition from other species is really not much in evidence. And so I tend to side with those who believe we haven't changed all that much.
Steven Rose is a wise and caring man who sometimes forgets his manners when speaking about those with whom he has sharp disagreements. But in this book he is at his best and most well-behaved. Let me finish with perhaps the wisest of his observations. He is speaking of the increased "powers of surveillance and coercion available to an authoritarian state." He warns, "The neurotechnologies [now available and to come] will add to these powers, but the real issue is probably not so much how to curb the technologies, but how to control the state." (p. 302)
--Dennis Littrell, author of “Understanding Evolution and Ourselves”
December 1, 2020
I would have preferred to give this book 3.5 stars but settled for 3. Rose makes a lot of compelling points but if you happen to know anything about Steven Rose the person as opposed to Steven Rose the neuroscientist you will quickly see the biases of his Marxist political ideology ooze right off the pages. Science should be objective and not viewed through ANY political or ideological lens if possible.
March 9, 2021
This book is about the history of neuroscience. The author is a biology professor. The photo of him for the book shows a friendly-looking man holding two lab mice. I hope those poor mice had a good life.
What really sparkled my interest was a chapter about how becoming a person and becoming a human are activities that fall under the responsibility of the being that was born with a brain.
This is the cover and editorial information of the volume I read:
The table of contents, with the very interesting chapters 4 and 5, about the transformation of an irrational animal into a human being and a person through the development of the brain. Fascinating!
This first chapter is really sticky. You feel that you cannot stop reading when the author is giving you his take on miracle brain pills and strategies to improve your brain capacity.
A few extremely interesting diagrams, including an illustration from an old book depicting a man opening a human skull to examine the brain.
some reflections on ADHD
And a few words on brain enhancement
Interesting and fascinating book, even when it can get dry at times. But I think it is worth it giving it a try.
I also have a blog! Here is the link: http://lunairereadings.blogspot.com
August 27, 2025
這本書的警示和教育味道很濃。批判大腦研究的三大難點(無解)：大腦的湧現性、複雜性；解釋者與被解釋者的同一性；歷史的與嵌入的第一人稱性。意思是，科學還原論的研究法有其困境。我想到，rose的說法就好像我們去醫院看病。每個病人都覺得他們的身體和疾病有個殊性，但醫生對特定疾病的療法卻是千篇一律。這就是rose講的we can't know。由此，我想到中醫。有人說中醫療法就像「黑箱理論」。而大腦的適當形容，正是一個與環境耦合的黑箱。此外，針對「解釋者與被解釋者的同一性」這個問題，我想到一個例子，如果某一天我得了阿茲海默症，然後我本身卻又沒有「病識感」，我健忘，卻又不認為自己健忘。那時我該怎麼辦？我想到金觀濤早年在破解「客觀性」命題的時候，提出用「公共性」來取代科學界所謂的「客觀性」。依我看，「公共性」正是「解釋者與被解釋者的同一性」這個難題的唯一解法。
December 27, 2020
“如果我的基因对我不满意，它们可以去死”，哈哈哈哈哈哈哈，所谓的自我意识难以证明。脑的演化很有趣。“一毛钱喝醉，两毛钱烂醉——逃离曼彻斯特最便宜的法子”。痛苦是精神病还是社会病，医疗是“现在就有幸福”抑或社会对个人的控制？作者举了切除额叶治疗癫痫的野蛮历史，不知道若干年后审视现在的精神药物，是否也会觉得野蛮。
January 16, 2014
Rose offers a useful overview of the work in neuroscience, beginning the the formation of the brain in other organisms, and building up to the human brain. Through his explanation of the human brain, he offers an important critique of the genetic reductionism that is increasingly popular in the field, demanding an historical materialist explanation of the mind. He also looks at the limitations in attempts to use biochemical treatments of aberrant behavior, etc. Rose is also a fairly entertaining writer, and his takedown of Pinker, etc. is pretty funny on occasion.
July 16, 2008
Wonderful ... easy for a layperson to read, but with enough big ideas to inspire plenty of marveling. There's even rather a lot that can be applied practically in a home or classroom!
(Note: Goodreads doesn't have the hardback version I read, but it's the same book.)
(Note: Goodreads doesn't have the hardback version I read, but it's the same book.)
Read
October 11, 2010I loved the excerpt I read! Provocative...and interesting theories on the development of the brain.
There is also a debate online between the 'Two Steves' at:http://www.edge.org/3rd_culture/pinke...
There is also a debate online between the 'Two Steves' at:http://www.edge.org/3rd_culture/pinke...
January 18, 2008
Interesting to hear from a well-known researcher in the field about adavnces in neuroscience, and its implications for people's lives. I enjoyed the book.
![[image error]](https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-A5ZmirNyR-Y/YEb-YUrYpsI/AAAAAAAAE2M/vPeYNtYakCs7b7kS1CF9wNS2OE42K8rdQCNcBGAsYHQ/s611/08.JPG){kind=link}
October 2, 2012
Solid background and critical look at the future. Enjoyed it.
Displaying 1 - 10 of 10 reviews