Product Details

• Amazon Sales Rank: #290279 in Books
• Published on: 2001-08
• Number of items: 1
• Binding: Paperback
• 356 pages

Amazon.co.uk Review
What's going on in there? If you want to get the latest in neural and behavioural science, there's no better place to turn than The Scientific American Book of the Brain. Thirty two heavyweight researchers and science writers contribute thoughtful, often eloquent reviews of their own and others' neuroscience research, aiming to help the intelligent reader quickly grasp the current state of knowledge. Reading Elizabeth Loftus on false memories, Kay Redfield Jamison on manic-depressive illness and Michael Gazzaniga on recent split-brain research is like attending a series of impressively cogent and engaging lectures, without any note-passing undergraduates to distract you. The articles are mostly from 1998, though a few range as far back as 1991; each represents the best, most current writing on its topic. Of particular interest to those who love a good debate are the side-by-side articles on the biological basis of homosexuality and the inclusion of consciousness within the domain of neurobiology by careful writers on opposing sides of each issue--it's a pleasant reminder that not all arguments need end in nationally-televised fistfights. You may want to use The Scientific American Book of the Brain as a reference but you'll find that the writing is so engrossing that minutes or hours will pass by while you browse and take in the world of the brain. --Rob Lightner

Synopsis
Thirty-two essays deal the brain's development, reasoning, general intelligence, memory, learning, behavior, brain diseases, and mental disorders.

Customer Reviews

Disappointed
I have to say I was really disappointed in this book, as I was expecting a collection of new, up-to-date scientific reveiw articles. This is in fact a collection of old articles, some of which I had read as an undergraduate over a decade ago: and things change a lot in a decade!
I also found some of the chapters (e.g. the stuff on I.Q.) to be unscientific and judgemental in tone, and I seriously question the accuracy of some of the content. If this is cutting edge, then it appears the study of I.Q. has progressed less than any other area in the last 100 years.
Perhaps I have just dipped into the bad chapters. But I really was expecting a lot more.