What do you think?
Rate this book
The River of Consciousness
From the best-selling author of Gratitude, On the Move, and Musicophilia, a collection of essays that displays Oliver Sacks's passionate engagement with the most compelling and seminal ideas of human endeavor: evolution, creativity, memory, time, consciousness, and experience.
Oliver Sacks, a scientist and a storyteller, is beloved by readers for the extraordinary neurological case histories (Awakenings, An Anthropologist on Mars) in which he introduced and explored many now familiar disorders--autism, Tourette's syndrome, face blindness, savant syndrome. He was also a memoirist who wrote with honesty and humor about the remarkable and strange encounters and experiences that shaped him (Uncle Tungsten, On the Move, Gratitude). Sacks, an Oxford-educated polymath, had a deep familiarity not only with literature and medicine but with botany, animal anatomy, chemistry, the history of science, philosophy, and psychology. The River of Consciousness is one of two books Sacks was working on up to his death, and it reveals his ability to make unexpected connections, his sheer joy in knowledge, and his unceasing, timeless project to understand what makes us human.
Oliver Sacks, a scientist and a storyteller, is beloved by readers for the extraordinary neurological case histories (Awakenings, An Anthropologist on Mars) in which he introduced and explored many now familiar disorders--autism, Tourette's syndrome, face blindness, savant syndrome. He was also a memoirist who wrote with honesty and humor about the remarkable and strange encounters and experiences that shaped him (Uncle Tungsten, On the Move, Gratitude). Sacks, an Oxford-educated polymath, had a deep familiarity not only with literature and medicine but with botany, animal anatomy, chemistry, the history of science, philosophy, and psychology. The River of Consciousness is one of two books Sacks was working on up to his death, and it reveals his ability to make unexpected connections, his sheer joy in knowledge, and his unceasing, timeless project to understand what makes us human.
256 pages, Hardcover
First published October 1, 2017
1345 people are currently reading
15203 people want to read
About the author
Oliver Sacks
135 books9,615 followersOliver Wolf Sacks, CBE, was a British neurologist residing in the United States, who has written popular books about his patients, the most famous of which is Awakenings, which was adapted into a film of the same name starring Robin Williams and Robert De Niro.
Sacks was the youngest of four children born to a prosperous North London Jewish couple: Sam, a physician, and Elsie, a surgeon. When he was six years old, he and his brother were evacuated from London to escape The Blitz, retreating to a boarding school in the Midlands, where he remained until 1943. During his youth, he was a keen amateur chemist, as recalled in his memoir Uncle Tungsten. He also learned to share his parents' enthusiasm for medicine and entered The Queen's College, Oxford University in 1951, from which he received a Bachelor of Arts (BA) in physiology and biology in 1954. At the same institution, he went on to earn in 1958, a Master of Arts (MA) and an MB ChB in chemistry, thereby qualifying to practice medicine.
After converting his British qualifications to American recognition (i.e., an MD as opposed to MB ChB), Sacks moved to New York, where he has lived since 1965, and taken twice weekly therapy sessions since 1966.
Sacks began consulting at chronic care facility Beth Abraham Hospital (now Beth Abraham Health Service) in 1966. At Beth Abraham, Sacks worked with a group of survivors of the 1920s sleeping sickness, encephalitis lethargica, who had been unable to move on their own for decades. These patients and his treatment of them were the basis of Sacks' book Awakenings.
His work at Beth Abraham helped provide the foundation on which the Institute for Music and Neurologic Function (IMNF), where Sacks is currently an honorary medical advisor, is built. In 2000, IMNF honored Sacks, its founder, with its first Music Has Power Award. The IMNF again bestowed a Music Has Power Award on Sacks in 2006 to commemorate "his 40 years at Beth Abraham and honor his outstanding contributions in support of music therapy and the effect of music on the human brain and mind".
Sacks was formerly employed as a clinical professor of neurology at the Albert Einstein College of Medicine and at the New York University School of Medicine, serving the latter school for 42 years. On 1 July 2007, Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons appointed Sacks to a position as professor of clinical neurology and clinical psychiatry, at the same time opening to him a new position as "artist", which the university hoped will help interconnect disciplines such as medicine, law, and economics. Sacks was a consultant neurologist to the Little Sisters of the Poor, and maintained a practice in New York City.
Since 1996, Sacks was a member of The American Academy of Arts and Letters (Literature). In 1999, Sacks became a Fellow of the New York Academy of Sciences. Also in 1999, he became an Honorary Fellow at The Queen's College, Oxford. In 2002, he became Fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences (Class IV—Humanities and Arts, Section 4—Literature).[38] and he was awarded the 2001 Lewis Thomas Prize by Rockefeller University. Sacks was awarded honorary doctorates from the College of Staten Island (1991), Tufts University (1991), New York Medical College (1991), Georgetown University (1992), Medical College of Pennsylvania (1992), Bard College (1992), Queen's University (Ontario) (2001), Gallaudet University (2005), University of Oxford (2005), Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú (2006). He was appointed Commander of the Order of the British Empire (CBE) in the 2008 Birthday Honours. Asteroid 84928 Oliversacks, discovered in 2003 and 2 miles (3.2 km) in diameter, has been named in his honor.
Sacks was the youngest of four children born to a prosperous North London Jewish couple: Sam, a physician, and Elsie, a surgeon. When he was six years old, he and his brother were evacuated from London to escape The Blitz, retreating to a boarding school in the Midlands, where he remained until 1943. During his youth, he was a keen amateur chemist, as recalled in his memoir Uncle Tungsten. He also learned to share his parents' enthusiasm for medicine and entered The Queen's College, Oxford University in 1951, from which he received a Bachelor of Arts (BA) in physiology and biology in 1954. At the same institution, he went on to earn in 1958, a Master of Arts (MA) and an MB ChB in chemistry, thereby qualifying to practice medicine.
After converting his British qualifications to American recognition (i.e., an MD as opposed to MB ChB), Sacks moved to New York, where he has lived since 1965, and taken twice weekly therapy sessions since 1966.
Sacks began consulting at chronic care facility Beth Abraham Hospital (now Beth Abraham Health Service) in 1966. At Beth Abraham, Sacks worked with a group of survivors of the 1920s sleeping sickness, encephalitis lethargica, who had been unable to move on their own for decades. These patients and his treatment of them were the basis of Sacks' book Awakenings.
His work at Beth Abraham helped provide the foundation on which the Institute for Music and Neurologic Function (IMNF), where Sacks is currently an honorary medical advisor, is built. In 2000, IMNF honored Sacks, its founder, with its first Music Has Power Award. The IMNF again bestowed a Music Has Power Award on Sacks in 2006 to commemorate "his 40 years at Beth Abraham and honor his outstanding contributions in support of music therapy and the effect of music on the human brain and mind".
Sacks was formerly employed as a clinical professor of neurology at the Albert Einstein College of Medicine and at the New York University School of Medicine, serving the latter school for 42 years. On 1 July 2007, Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons appointed Sacks to a position as professor of clinical neurology and clinical psychiatry, at the same time opening to him a new position as "artist", which the university hoped will help interconnect disciplines such as medicine, law, and economics. Sacks was a consultant neurologist to the Little Sisters of the Poor, and maintained a practice in New York City.
Since 1996, Sacks was a member of The American Academy of Arts and Letters (Literature). In 1999, Sacks became a Fellow of the New York Academy of Sciences. Also in 1999, he became an Honorary Fellow at The Queen's College, Oxford. In 2002, he became Fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences (Class IV—Humanities and Arts, Section 4—Literature).[38] and he was awarded the 2001 Lewis Thomas Prize by Rockefeller University. Sacks was awarded honorary doctorates from the College of Staten Island (1991), Tufts University (1991), New York Medical College (1991), Georgetown University (1992), Medical College of Pennsylvania (1992), Bard College (1992), Queen's University (Ontario) (2001), Gallaudet University (2005), University of Oxford (2005), Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú (2006). He was appointed Commander of the Order of the British Empire (CBE) in the 2008 Birthday Honours. Asteroid 84928 Oliversacks, discovered in 2003 and 2 miles (3.2 km) in diameter, has been named in his honor.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 748 reviews
April 28, 2023
Oliver Sacks a suferit de „păcatul” curiozității. Neurologia a fost doar una din pasiunile sale. A urmărit și alte domenii (înrudite cu medicina) și a meditat asupra științei în general (a se vedea eseul „Scotom: Uitare și ignorare în știință”, pp.155-180). Termenul „scotom” desemnează (aici) o lacună de memorie (pp.164-165).
Textele adunate în acest volum sînt scrise limpede și, chiar dacă depășesc nivelul unui articol de vulgarizare, rămîn accesibile. Unele sînt de-a dreptul amuzante.
De pildă, în „Imperfecțiunea memoriei” (pp.90-106), Sacks arată că oamenii nu suferă doar de lacune, de mici amnezii (uneori foarte supărătoare), de temutul „lapsus” la examene, ci și de un „surplus” de amintiri: ne amintim perfect evenimente pe care nu le-am trăit. Și nu ne îndoim de „adevărul” lor, ba sîntem gata să băgăm mîna în foc pentru ele. Asta înseamnă că mintea noastră rescrie permanent trecutul, nu doar din cauze psihanalizabile (fiindcă nu ne convin unele pățanii), ci și dintr-un motiv legat mai degrabă de un impuls creativ obscur. M-am gîndit că multe dintre întîmplările citite în cărți (în romane cu puternic impact afectiv, îndeosebi) se mută în biografiile noastre și ne modifică trecutul personal fără să ne dăm seama. Interesant este că nu putem deosebi (nici neurologic, nici psihic) o amintire „adevărată” de una „intrusă” în memoria noastră. Fără să suferim de mitomanie, brodăm nu numai despre viitor, ci și despre trecut.
Un alt eseu interesant este cel numit deasupra: „Scotom: Uitare și ignorare în știință”. Sacks a constatat că multe invenții științifice strălucite sînt pentru o vreme uitate de comunitatea științifică. Și sînt atît de bine ascunse în întuneric încît e nevoie, adesea, de un nou descoperitor. Cum se face că omenirea a uitat un mileniu și jumătate ipoteza heliocentrică a lui Aristarch? Ipoteza gînditorului grec nu era o simplă opinie cu privire la univers, avea și temeiuri experimentale. În plus, era mai simplă decît ipoteza lui Ptolemeu, caracterizată de Oliver Sacks ca fiind „de o complexitate babilonică” (p.171). Uitarea acestor invenții și descoperiri nu e simplu de explicat...
Aș mai menționa două eseuri care mi-au stîrnit interesul. Primul se referă la conștiința animalelor zise „inferioare” și chiar la „inteligența” lor („Conștiință: Viețile mentale ale plantelor și rîmelor”, pp.59-72), al doilea la „Sinele creativ” (pp.112-126).
Citiți cartea. E amuzantă. Și plină de învățăminte...
Textele adunate în acest volum sînt scrise limpede și, chiar dacă depășesc nivelul unui articol de vulgarizare, rămîn accesibile. Unele sînt de-a dreptul amuzante.
De pildă, în „Imperfecțiunea memoriei” (pp.90-106), Sacks arată că oamenii nu suferă doar de lacune, de mici amnezii (uneori foarte supărătoare), de temutul „lapsus” la examene, ci și de un „surplus” de amintiri: ne amintim perfect evenimente pe care nu le-am trăit. Și nu ne îndoim de „adevărul” lor, ba sîntem gata să băgăm mîna în foc pentru ele. Asta înseamnă că mintea noastră rescrie permanent trecutul, nu doar din cauze psihanalizabile (fiindcă nu ne convin unele pățanii), ci și dintr-un motiv legat mai degrabă de un impuls creativ obscur. M-am gîndit că multe dintre întîmplările citite în cărți (în romane cu puternic impact afectiv, îndeosebi) se mută în biografiile noastre și ne modifică trecutul personal fără să ne dăm seama. Interesant este că nu putem deosebi (nici neurologic, nici psihic) o amintire „adevărată” de una „intrusă” în memoria noastră. Fără să suferim de mitomanie, brodăm nu numai despre viitor, ci și despre trecut.
Un alt eseu interesant este cel numit deasupra: „Scotom: Uitare și ignorare în știință”. Sacks a constatat că multe invenții științifice strălucite sînt pentru o vreme uitate de comunitatea științifică. Și sînt atît de bine ascunse în întuneric încît e nevoie, adesea, de un nou descoperitor. Cum se face că omenirea a uitat un mileniu și jumătate ipoteza heliocentrică a lui Aristarch? Ipoteza gînditorului grec nu era o simplă opinie cu privire la univers, avea și temeiuri experimentale. În plus, era mai simplă decît ipoteza lui Ptolemeu, caracterizată de Oliver Sacks ca fiind „de o complexitate babilonică” (p.171). Uitarea acestor invenții și descoperiri nu e simplu de explicat...
Aș mai menționa două eseuri care mi-au stîrnit interesul. Primul se referă la conștiința animalelor zise „inferioare” și chiar la „inteligența” lor („Conștiință: Viețile mentale ale plantelor și rîmelor”, pp.59-72), al doilea la „Sinele creativ” (pp.112-126).
Citiți cartea. E amuzantă. Și plină de învățăminte...
January 22, 2022
This might be described as an Oliver Sacks primer. I’ve enjoyed it. Dr. Sacks was known for his fondness for the footnote, which is little in evidence here. So this might be a very good place to start for those new to his work. Moreover, it has a little taste of each of his books, among them: Migraine, A Leg to Stand On, The Man Who Mistook His Wife for a Hat, An Anthropologist On Mars, The Island of the Colorblind, Hallucinations, and Awakenings, his fascinating magnum opus in which the footnotes sometimes rival the main text in length.
Sacks’s hobby was botany, which makes his insights in the chapter “Darwin and the Meaning of Flowers” irresistible. On studying an orchid with a footlong nectary, Darwin predicted a moth with a matching proboscis would eventually be found which was that blossom’s particular pollinator. “More than 130 years after Darwin first suggested that a large moth pollinated an African orchid, his hypothesis was confirmed. It took quite some time, but quite clearly Darwin's prediction, based on extremely limited evidence but bolstered by his understanding of his own new theory of natural selection, was correct.” (The Guardian 2 Oct 2013.)
The last chapter, “Scotoma: Forgetting and Neglect in Science,” speaks to the absense of historical consciousness in science. This area is now starting to be addressed, but for most of the 20th century it was not. To tell the tale Sacks revisits the story of his own injured left leg (see A Leg to Stand On). After experiencing alienation from his injured leg, as if it did not belong to him, he mentioned this sensation to his doctor who dismissed the notion out of hand. This angered Sacks who set about looking for case literature on the subject. He found nothing for three years. Then he came upon three works.
The first was “an account by Silas Weir Mitchell, an American neurologist working at a Philadelphia hospital for amputees during the Civil War. He described, very fully and carefully, phantom limbs (or ‘sensory ghosts,’ as he called them) that amputees experienced in place of their lost limbs. He also wrote of ‘negative phantoms,’ the subjective annihilation and alienation of limbs following severe injury and surgery. He was so struck by these phenomena that he wrote a special circular on the matter, which was distributed by the surgeon general’s office in 1864.
“Weir Mitchell’s observations aroused brief interest but then disappeared. More than fifty years passed before the syndrome was rediscovered as thousands of new cases of neurological trauma were treated during the First World War. In 1917, the French neurologist Joseph Babinski . . . published a monograph in which, apparently ignorant of Weir Mitchell’s report, he described the syndrome I had experienced with my own leg injury. Babinski’s observations, like Weir Mitchell’s, sank without a trace. (When, in 1975, I finally came upon Babinski’s book in our library, I found I was the first person to have borrowed it since 1918.) During the Second World War, the syndrome was fully described for a third time by two Soviet neurologists, Aleksei N. Leont’ev and Alexander Zaporozhets— again in ignorance of their predecessors. Yet though their book, Rehabilitation of Hand Function, was translated into English in 1960, their observations completely failed to enter the consciousness of either neurologists or rehabilitation specialists.
“The work of Weir Mitchell and Babinski, of Leont’ev and Zaporozhets, seemed to have fallen into a historical or cultural scotoma, a ‘memory hole,’ as Orwell would say.
“As I pieced together this extraordinary, even bizarre story, I felt more sympathy with my surgeon’s saying that he had never heard of anything like my symptoms before. The syndrome is not that uncommon: it occurs whenever there is a significant loss of proprioception and other sensory feedback through immobility or nerve damage. But why is it so difficult to put this on the record, to give the syndrome its due place in our neurological knowledge and consciousness?” (p. 196)
The chapter “Mishearings” is probably the funniest thing Sacks has ever written—just hilarious this unquestionably informative application of his clinical sensibilities to his own failing hearing.
“When Kate spoke of going to choir practice [actually a chiropractor], I accepted this: she could have been going to choir practice. But when a friend spoke one day about ‘a big-time cuttlefish diagnosed with ALS,’ I felt I must be mishearing. Cephalopods have elaborate nervous systems, it is true, and perhaps, I thought for a split second, a cuttlefish could have ALS. But the idea of a ‘big-time’ cuttlefish was ridiculous. (It turned out to be ‘a big-time publicist.’)” (p. 125)
So three fascinating examples, one very detailed, of the essays included here. I recommend all of Dr. Sacks's books, including this one, unreservedly.
Sacks’s hobby was botany, which makes his insights in the chapter “Darwin and the Meaning of Flowers” irresistible. On studying an orchid with a footlong nectary, Darwin predicted a moth with a matching proboscis would eventually be found which was that blossom’s particular pollinator. “More than 130 years after Darwin first suggested that a large moth pollinated an African orchid, his hypothesis was confirmed. It took quite some time, but quite clearly Darwin's prediction, based on extremely limited evidence but bolstered by his understanding of his own new theory of natural selection, was correct.” (The Guardian 2 Oct 2013.)
The last chapter, “Scotoma: Forgetting and Neglect in Science,” speaks to the absense of historical consciousness in science. This area is now starting to be addressed, but for most of the 20th century it was not. To tell the tale Sacks revisits the story of his own injured left leg (see A Leg to Stand On). After experiencing alienation from his injured leg, as if it did not belong to him, he mentioned this sensation to his doctor who dismissed the notion out of hand. This angered Sacks who set about looking for case literature on the subject. He found nothing for three years. Then he came upon three works.
The first was “an account by Silas Weir Mitchell, an American neurologist working at a Philadelphia hospital for amputees during the Civil War. He described, very fully and carefully, phantom limbs (or ‘sensory ghosts,’ as he called them) that amputees experienced in place of their lost limbs. He also wrote of ‘negative phantoms,’ the subjective annihilation and alienation of limbs following severe injury and surgery. He was so struck by these phenomena that he wrote a special circular on the matter, which was distributed by the surgeon general’s office in 1864.
“Weir Mitchell’s observations aroused brief interest but then disappeared. More than fifty years passed before the syndrome was rediscovered as thousands of new cases of neurological trauma were treated during the First World War. In 1917, the French neurologist Joseph Babinski . . . published a monograph in which, apparently ignorant of Weir Mitchell’s report, he described the syndrome I had experienced with my own leg injury. Babinski’s observations, like Weir Mitchell’s, sank without a trace. (When, in 1975, I finally came upon Babinski’s book in our library, I found I was the first person to have borrowed it since 1918.) During the Second World War, the syndrome was fully described for a third time by two Soviet neurologists, Aleksei N. Leont’ev and Alexander Zaporozhets— again in ignorance of their predecessors. Yet though their book, Rehabilitation of Hand Function, was translated into English in 1960, their observations completely failed to enter the consciousness of either neurologists or rehabilitation specialists.
“The work of Weir Mitchell and Babinski, of Leont’ev and Zaporozhets, seemed to have fallen into a historical or cultural scotoma, a ‘memory hole,’ as Orwell would say.
“As I pieced together this extraordinary, even bizarre story, I felt more sympathy with my surgeon’s saying that he had never heard of anything like my symptoms before. The syndrome is not that uncommon: it occurs whenever there is a significant loss of proprioception and other sensory feedback through immobility or nerve damage. But why is it so difficult to put this on the record, to give the syndrome its due place in our neurological knowledge and consciousness?” (p. 196)
The chapter “Mishearings” is probably the funniest thing Sacks has ever written—just hilarious this unquestionably informative application of his clinical sensibilities to his own failing hearing.
“When Kate spoke of going to choir practice [actually a chiropractor], I accepted this: she could have been going to choir practice. But when a friend spoke one day about ‘a big-time cuttlefish diagnosed with ALS,’ I felt I must be mishearing. Cephalopods have elaborate nervous systems, it is true, and perhaps, I thought for a split second, a cuttlefish could have ALS. But the idea of a ‘big-time’ cuttlefish was ridiculous. (It turned out to be ‘a big-time publicist.’)” (p. 125)
So three fascinating examples, one very detailed, of the essays included here. I recommend all of Dr. Sacks's books, including this one, unreservedly.
February 5, 2019
Oliver Sacks was a neurologist and a great author. He wrote a number of memorable books about psychology, psychiatry and neurology. He is most famous for his books such as The Man Who Mistook His Wife for a Hat and Other Clinical Tales and An Anthropologist on Mars: Seven Paradoxical Tales. These books try to use very unusual minds and psychological conditions to understand better how the brain works. But it is not fair to focus on just these books; he was a Renaissance man, and he wrote a wide range of books and could converse intelligently on many many subjects.
This book is not just about consciousness, per se. In fact, the book's title is a play on words; "Stream of Consciousness" may also be a good description, as each chapter is really an essay about a different topic. Each essay is wonderful and entertaining; a chapter about Darwin, Freud, Poincaré, Tourette's syndrome, color blindness, face blindness, and other interesting topics. Be warned though; some of this book is difficult; for me, the chapter about Freud was especially difficult.
The most interesting aspect of the book is his focus on periods of darkness, which he called "scotoma". This term is used in multiple ways. First, an individual can have a black-out period in which memory or vision disappears. Then, there is a societal scientific scotoma, where a whole body of knowledge seems to disappear--sometimes for centuries--before reappearing at a later time. Tourette's syndrome is one of these scotoma's, because it was known during the 19th century, but disappeared from the scientific literature before being revived late in the 20th. Another one is the astronomical concept of the sun being the center of the solar system--known to the ancient Greeks, but Aristotle and Ptolemy changed this view to a geocentric universe, until Copernicus brought the correct theory back to science.
This book is one of Sacks' last books--he may have still been writing it when he died in 2015. But, besides being short, the book feels like it was finished properly.
I didn't read this book; I listened to the audiobook. Dan Woren does an excellent reading of the book, and if you are able to listen to nonfiction attentively, then I heartily recommend it.
This book is not just about consciousness, per se. In fact, the book's title is a play on words; "Stream of Consciousness" may also be a good description, as each chapter is really an essay about a different topic. Each essay is wonderful and entertaining; a chapter about Darwin, Freud, Poincaré, Tourette's syndrome, color blindness, face blindness, and other interesting topics. Be warned though; some of this book is difficult; for me, the chapter about Freud was especially difficult.
The most interesting aspect of the book is his focus on periods of darkness, which he called "scotoma". This term is used in multiple ways. First, an individual can have a black-out period in which memory or vision disappears. Then, there is a societal scientific scotoma, where a whole body of knowledge seems to disappear--sometimes for centuries--before reappearing at a later time. Tourette's syndrome is one of these scotoma's, because it was known during the 19th century, but disappeared from the scientific literature before being revived late in the 20th. Another one is the astronomical concept of the sun being the center of the solar system--known to the ancient Greeks, but Aristotle and Ptolemy changed this view to a geocentric universe, until Copernicus brought the correct theory back to science.
This book is one of Sacks' last books--he may have still been writing it when he died in 2015. But, besides being short, the book feels like it was finished properly.
I didn't read this book; I listened to the audiobook. Dan Woren does an excellent reading of the book, and if you are able to listen to nonfiction attentively, then I heartily recommend it.
October 28, 2017
I have found that as I've read books written later in Sacks' life, his tone shifts from a focus on specific details to a more abstract and comprehensive overview that delves more into the meanings of his life's observations. The River of Consciousness was, for me, an excellent culmination of that change in tone and focus. Sacks writes about all areas of science with such grace and art that you can't help but be completely consumed. There were moments in The River of Consciousness, especially towards the beginning, where I detected a change in tone or voice that may be indicative of the ghost writing involved in finishing this book, but the majority of the book and latter half especially filled me with enough awe and fascination that I would still consider this one of my favorite Sacks reads. I will miss his writing dearly and I am sure I will be revisiting his books often.
January 20, 2018
A fairly mixed bag of variable quality. Essays on Darwin, Time, Freud, and more. All were beautifully written and superficially interesting, but never really inspiring and rarely thought provoking. I read an essay, stopped momentarily, and then moved onto the next one. Yes, I did enjoy reading it, but I also sensed a lack of depth or coherence I didn’t associate with Sacks.
October 19, 2021
O. Sacks bir nöro-psikiyatrist, daha önceki kitaplarında mesleki deneyimlerinden bahsettiğini biliyoruz. Bu kitabı ise ölümünden önce planladığı ve yazdığı son kitabı olduğundan daha önceki kitaplarının hatırlatıldığı anlatı-inceleme-deneme karışımı bir kitap. Edebiyatçı yönünden çok bilim insanı, hekim kimliğini öne çıkarmış, öyle ki popüler bilim dili kullanmasına rağmen birçok bölüm, kullanılan dilde bilimsel doz çok yüksek olduğundan zor anlaşılıyor. Özellikle nörofizyoloji ile ilgili bilgileri içeren bölümler, bir tıp dergisinde yayınlanmasa bile, tıp camiasındakilere hitap eden yayınlarda görülecek nitelikte.
Dehası ve devrimci yönüyle Darwin’i çok etkileyici anlatmış. Bilimdeki özellikle tıptaki kara delikleri, tesadüfleri fazlaca öne çıkarmasını projesini aceleye getirmesine bağlıyorum. Evrim, botanik, kimya, tıp ve tabii ki nöroloji ve psikiyatri ile ilgili kafasına takılan veya yeterince konuşulmadığını düşündüğü konuları okurlarıyla paylaşmış. Kitabın ismini “bilinç akışı”ndan esinlenerek koyduğunu sanıyorum. Tıbbi konulardan sıkılma riski olsa da ilginç bir okuma olabilir.
Dehası ve devrimci yönüyle Darwin’i çok etkileyici anlatmış. Bilimdeki özellikle tıptaki kara delikleri, tesadüfleri fazlaca öne çıkarmasını projesini aceleye getirmesine bağlıyorum. Evrim, botanik, kimya, tıp ve tabii ki nöroloji ve psikiyatri ile ilgili kafasına takılan veya yeterince konuşulmadığını düşündüğü konuları okurlarıyla paylaşmış. Kitabın ismini “bilinç akışı”ndan esinlenerek koyduğunu sanıyorum. Tıbbi konulardan sıkılma riski olsa da ilginç bir okuma olabilir.
November 26, 2020
As a really interesting primer on Oliver Sacks, published after his death, I can't recommend this book enough. It's short, lucid, and full of interesting tidbits that explore the neurophysiological foundations of consciousness, from Darwin to Freud to regular philosophy. But it doesn't end there, moving into Sacks' own major field of study.
When it comes to problems of perception and physical problems that lead to the breakdown into altered states of consciousness, Sacks shines. He always humanizes his case studies and elucidates upon them into rather reasonable but utterly fascinating conclusions.
This does touch broadly upon the full subject of consciousness and I really enjoyed it. This is very much a science book and while it is hardly exhaustive, it does paint a very interesting picture that may very well spark a fire in our minds.
I'd very much recommend this for young readers and anyone who still believes in science. The mind is not unknowable. It does still need to be seriously considered.
I LOVED the full discussions about speeded perceptions and slowed perceptions. I have a soft spot for it because I've written a number of novels based on it. :)
When it comes to problems of perception and physical problems that lead to the breakdown into altered states of consciousness, Sacks shines. He always humanizes his case studies and elucidates upon them into rather reasonable but utterly fascinating conclusions.
This does touch broadly upon the full subject of consciousness and I really enjoyed it. This is very much a science book and while it is hardly exhaustive, it does paint a very interesting picture that may very well spark a fire in our minds.
I'd very much recommend this for young readers and anyone who still believes in science. The mind is not unknowable. It does still need to be seriously considered.
I LOVED the full discussions about speeded perceptions and slowed perceptions. I have a soft spot for it because I've written a number of novels based on it. :)
April 6, 2019
The River of Consciousness, the last book Oliver Sacks compiled before his death, is classic Oliver Sacks. He tells swimmingly-good stories, often eventually examining neurological phenomena, but weaving together widely-disparate data to tell his story. In his essay Speed, for example, Sacks talked about plant growth, photography, a horse's gallop, changes in time perception with age, the apparent compression and expansion of time under various conditions, myoclonic jerks, etc. He referred to William James, H. G. Wells, Karl Ernst von Baer, Hannah Arendt, and many others. You get the picture.
Sacks loved to examine errors and kept lists of his own mishearings in his journal (he was very deaf and made many). His assistant confusingly talked about being off to "choir practice" – which he later learned was the chiropractor. When on another day she jokingly said she was off to choir practice, he heard "firecrackers." While Freud and many of the rest of us see such mistakes in pejorative ways, Sacks saw them as opportunities to understand general phenomena. Everything – everything – is grist for the mill. For example, If a mishearing seems plausible, one may not think one has misheard; it is only if the mishearing is sufficiently implausible, or entirely out of context, that one thinks, “This can’t be right,” and (perhaps with some embarrassment) asks the speaker to repeat himself" (Loc. 1390-1392). And why, he asks, do we mishear words, but not music? Why do we mishear lyrics and not the notes?
Sack's discussion of plagiarism is similarly interesting – and goes in a direction different than most of us would take it (I am currently grading papers and have a very different perspective). Brian Williams, for example, was suspended from NBC for six months for exaggerating his role in a helicopter episode in Iraq. Sacks, however, in talking about President Reagan telling a story that was "an almost exact duplicate of a scene in the 1944 film A Wing and a Prayer" concluded that "Reagan had apparently retained the facts but forgotten their source (Loc. 1192-1195). Elizabeth Loftus would be happy with Sacks' analysis.
Sacks continues his discussion of plagiarism: What would it be like if we remembered everything and its source?
"Confusion over sources or indifference to them can be a paradoxical strength: if we could tag the sources of all our knowledge, we would be overwhelmed with often irrelevant information. Indifference to source allows us to assimilate what we read, what we are told, what others say and think and write and paint, as intensely and richly as if they were primary experiences. It allows us to see and hear with other eyes and ears, to enter into other minds, to assimilate the art and science and religion of the whole culture, to enter into and contribute to the common mind, the general commonwealth of knowledge. Memory arises not only from experience but from the intercourse of many minds" (Loc. 1353-1358).
And this: "What is at issue is not the fact of “borrowing” or “imitating,” of being “derivative,” being “influenced,” but what one does with what is borrowed or imitated or derived; how deeply one assimilates it, takes it into oneself, compounds it with one’s own experiences and thoughts and feelings, places it in relation to oneself, and expresses it in a new way, one’s own" (Loc. 1565-1567).
I have read perhaps five of Sacks' books and will likely read more as I run across them. The first of these – The Man Who Mistook His Wife For a Hat – was one of a handful of books that shook my world and made me look at it differently.
The world is a poorer place without Oliver Sacks (1933-2015).
Sacks loved to examine errors and kept lists of his own mishearings in his journal (he was very deaf and made many). His assistant confusingly talked about being off to "choir practice" – which he later learned was the chiropractor. When on another day she jokingly said she was off to choir practice, he heard "firecrackers." While Freud and many of the rest of us see such mistakes in pejorative ways, Sacks saw them as opportunities to understand general phenomena. Everything – everything – is grist for the mill. For example, If a mishearing seems plausible, one may not think one has misheard; it is only if the mishearing is sufficiently implausible, or entirely out of context, that one thinks, “This can’t be right,” and (perhaps with some embarrassment) asks the speaker to repeat himself" (Loc. 1390-1392). And why, he asks, do we mishear words, but not music? Why do we mishear lyrics and not the notes?
Sack's discussion of plagiarism is similarly interesting – and goes in a direction different than most of us would take it (I am currently grading papers and have a very different perspective). Brian Williams, for example, was suspended from NBC for six months for exaggerating his role in a helicopter episode in Iraq. Sacks, however, in talking about President Reagan telling a story that was "an almost exact duplicate of a scene in the 1944 film A Wing and a Prayer" concluded that "Reagan had apparently retained the facts but forgotten their source (Loc. 1192-1195). Elizabeth Loftus would be happy with Sacks' analysis.
Sacks continues his discussion of plagiarism: What would it be like if we remembered everything and its source?
"Confusion over sources or indifference to them can be a paradoxical strength: if we could tag the sources of all our knowledge, we would be overwhelmed with often irrelevant information. Indifference to source allows us to assimilate what we read, what we are told, what others say and think and write and paint, as intensely and richly as if they were primary experiences. It allows us to see and hear with other eyes and ears, to enter into other minds, to assimilate the art and science and religion of the whole culture, to enter into and contribute to the common mind, the general commonwealth of knowledge. Memory arises not only from experience but from the intercourse of many minds" (Loc. 1353-1358).
And this: "What is at issue is not the fact of “borrowing” or “imitating,” of being “derivative,” being “influenced,” but what one does with what is borrowed or imitated or derived; how deeply one assimilates it, takes it into oneself, compounds it with one’s own experiences and thoughts and feelings, places it in relation to oneself, and expresses it in a new way, one’s own" (Loc. 1565-1567).
I have read perhaps five of Sacks' books and will likely read more as I run across them. The first of these – The Man Who Mistook His Wife For a Hat – was one of a handful of books that shook my world and made me look at it differently.
The world is a poorer place without Oliver Sacks (1933-2015).
October 12, 2017
A short collection of previously published essays that make us feel the loss of a person like Oliver Sacks very keenly. He loved science and scientific advances in all fields, not just his chosen profession of neuroscience. The collection is a bit too eclectic to be was wonderful as something like The Man Who Mistook His Wife For a Hat. The essays on Darwin aren’t that interesting but for the essays that focus more particularly on neuroscience and the brain, especially “Scotoma: Forgetting and Neglect in Science,” his love and passion shine through.
May 11, 2018
Not his most cohesive or engaging book, but still worth the read.
September 1, 2020
This is a collection of essays on various topics that was compiled and published after Sacks' death. As such, there isn't much of an overarching theme across the pieces, and the ones I enjoyed mostly retold or reframed stories from his previous books - particularly The Man Who Mistook His Wife For A Hat, An Anthropologist on Mars, Musicophilia, Hallucinations, and A Leg To Stand On. If you haven't read those, I'd recommend them over this one. Still, Sacks was an incredibly thoughtful and wise writer, and I don't regret reading this at all.
June 24, 2019
I like Oliver Sacks for how he describes the world and how he analyses every little fact. I love how he finds "marvelous" from defective beings: be that a man or a theory or a phenomena. However, I cannot reconcile with his interest in psychoanalysis, and specifically Freud. Though I gather that he liked his methods because Freud was more of descriptive kind of guy, Sacks forgets how Freud just ignores systematic findings, scientific methods and oppositional evidence. If you do that, you will end up with a guy that has beautiful imaginative mind with wonderful descriptions of psychosis and the being inside. However Freud was never "that". And using him to argue for considering opposition in science, is ridiculous to me.
However, Oliver Sacks argument for a need of depth is completely valid to me. I just don't think that he was successful at giving a good solution to that problem.
However, Oliver Sacks argument for a need of depth is completely valid to me. I just don't think that he was successful at giving a good solution to that problem.
February 28, 2021
A must read in my opinion!
November 15, 2020
Aklın Gözü kitabından sonra ikinci Oliver Sacks kitabım. Disiplinler arasında dolaşarak bitkiden hayvana beynin işleyişine ve belleğin yanılabilirliğine değinmiş aslen nörolog olan yazar. Hatta migren ataklarından ve araştırmalardan bahsetmiş. Kitapta benim en cok ilgimi çeken bölüm "Yaratıcı Kendilik" oldu.
"Çok katı, çok kalıplaşmış, anlatıdan çok yoksun bir eğitim çocuğun aktif ve sorgulayıcı zihnini öldürebilir. Eğitim yapı ve özgürlük arasında bir denge kurmalıdır; çocukların gereksinimleri de büyük ölçüde farklılık gösterebilir. Bazı genç zihinler iyi bir öğretimle serpilip gelişir. En yaratıcı olanların bazıları dahil başka çocuklarsa formel öğretime direnç gösterebilir; bunlar temelde, kendi kendilerine öğrenmeye ve keşfetmeye meraklı otodidaktlardır."
"Çok katı, çok kalıplaşmış, anlatıdan çok yoksun bir eğitim çocuğun aktif ve sorgulayıcı zihnini öldürebilir. Eğitim yapı ve özgürlük arasında bir denge kurmalıdır; çocukların gereksinimleri de büyük ölçüde farklılık gösterebilir. Bazı genç zihinler iyi bir öğretimle serpilip gelişir. En yaratıcı olanların bazıları dahil başka çocuklarsa formel öğretime direnç gösterebilir; bunlar temelde, kendi kendilerine öğrenmeye ve keşfetmeye meraklı otodidaktlardır."
June 24, 2021
I must confess The River of Consciousness, despite its Borgesian title, did not captivate me as much as other Oliver Sacks’ books. However, Sacks being Sacks, I learned a lot from this one, too (even slightly irrelevant facts I bet I won’t forget as easily as more important ones, like the fact that there are people with Tourette’s who can catch a fly on the wings because their have a different perception of speed).
One of the most intriguing essays is The Fallibility of Memory, with the doubt it rises about what we remember, that is, what we think we remember. It seems that our memories, especially our earliest ones, are rarely reliable because our mind often mingles stories we were told or read with what really happened to us. Actually, the psychologist and memory researcher Elizabeth Loftus has proved (by experimentally implanting false memories in her subjects’ minds) that the so-called recovered memories of traumatic experiences, memories that ruined lives and families, could have been, in some cases, insinuated or planted by others (perhaps a therapist, a teacher, a social worker, an investigator and so on), in the minds of highly suggestible persons (children, a teenagers, bipolars, etc.).
Remarkably interesting is also the essay The Creative Self. After presenting the distinction Merlin Donald made (in the Origins of the Modern Mind) between mimicry (exact imitation), imitation (which is never an exact copy of others’ behaviour), and mimesis (which, in Donald’s own words “usually incorporates both mimicry and imitation to a higher end, that of re-enacting and re-presenting an event or relationship”), Sacks underlines that “mimetic culture” has been a crucial stage in our evolution, for the creative self is nothing but a synthesis of cultural influences, borrowed ideas (a sort of involuntary plagiarism), social and intellectual influences that were assimilated and combined with personal experience to be afterwards expressed in an original way. However, even though many are born with a creative self and show a brilliant promise in their youth, they fail to fulfill this promise, because they lack that “special energy, over and above one’s creative potential, a special audacity or subversiveness, to strike out in a new direction once one is settled.”
The last essay, Scotoma: Forgetting and Neglect in Science, is an apt metaphor of the obstacles science had to overcome, be them religious beliefs, social prejudices or simply aesthetic stereotypes, all of them floating scotomas that prevent a clear sight. Take, for example, the great naturalist Philip Henry Gosse, who tried to solve the debate around evolution / natural selection in his book, Omphalos, by stating that the fossils were not ancient creatures “but were merely put in the rocks by the Creator to rebuke our curiosity—an argument which had the unusual distinction of infuriating zoologists and theologians in equal measure.”
Or Newton and Galileo, who must have been aware of chaos as part of nature but did not feel like formulating a theory about it, for they could not accept an irrational, unlawful, disorderly Nature. And more than two centuries later, Henri Poincaré still had the same feeling, admitting that the mathematical consequences of chaos deeply disturbed him. As for and Einstein, it is well known he could not bear the irrational nature of quantum mechanics, dismissing them as superficial representations of natural processes.
I will finish with a quote I found quite comforting given that I, like Doris Lessing, have always believed that being healthy is simply a question of luck:
One of the most intriguing essays is The Fallibility of Memory, with the doubt it rises about what we remember, that is, what we think we remember. It seems that our memories, especially our earliest ones, are rarely reliable because our mind often mingles stories we were told or read with what really happened to us. Actually, the psychologist and memory researcher Elizabeth Loftus has proved (by experimentally implanting false memories in her subjects’ minds) that the so-called recovered memories of traumatic experiences, memories that ruined lives and families, could have been, in some cases, insinuated or planted by others (perhaps a therapist, a teacher, a social worker, an investigator and so on), in the minds of highly suggestible persons (children, a teenagers, bipolars, etc.).
What is clear in all these cases—whether of imagined or real abuse in childhood, of genuine or experimentally implanted memories, of misled witnesses and brainwashed prisoners, of unconscious plagiarism, and of the false memories we all have based on misattribution or source confusion—is that in the absence of outside confirmation there is no easy way of distinguishing a genuine memory or inspiration, felt as such, from those that have been borrowed or suggested, between what Donald Spence calls “historical truth” and “narrative truth.
Remarkably interesting is also the essay The Creative Self. After presenting the distinction Merlin Donald made (in the Origins of the Modern Mind) between mimicry (exact imitation), imitation (which is never an exact copy of others’ behaviour), and mimesis (which, in Donald’s own words “usually incorporates both mimicry and imitation to a higher end, that of re-enacting and re-presenting an event or relationship”), Sacks underlines that “mimetic culture” has been a crucial stage in our evolution, for the creative self is nothing but a synthesis of cultural influences, borrowed ideas (a sort of involuntary plagiarism), social and intellectual influences that were assimilated and combined with personal experience to be afterwards expressed in an original way. However, even though many are born with a creative self and show a brilliant promise in their youth, they fail to fulfill this promise, because they lack that “special energy, over and above one’s creative potential, a special audacity or subversiveness, to strike out in a new direction once one is settled.”
The last essay, Scotoma: Forgetting and Neglect in Science, is an apt metaphor of the obstacles science had to overcome, be them religious beliefs, social prejudices or simply aesthetic stereotypes, all of them floating scotomas that prevent a clear sight. Take, for example, the great naturalist Philip Henry Gosse, who tried to solve the debate around evolution / natural selection in his book, Omphalos, by stating that the fossils were not ancient creatures “but were merely put in the rocks by the Creator to rebuke our curiosity—an argument which had the unusual distinction of infuriating zoologists and theologians in equal measure.”
Or Newton and Galileo, who must have been aware of chaos as part of nature but did not feel like formulating a theory about it, for they could not accept an irrational, unlawful, disorderly Nature. And more than two centuries later, Henri Poincaré still had the same feeling, admitting that the mathematical consequences of chaos deeply disturbed him. As for and Einstein, it is well known he could not bear the irrational nature of quantum mechanics, dismissing them as superficial representations of natural processes.
I will finish with a quote I found quite comforting given that I, like Doris Lessing, have always believed that being healthy is simply a question of luck:
Doris Lessing once wrote of the situation of my postencephalitic patients, “It makes you aware of what a knife-edge we live on.” Yet, in health, we live not on a knife edge but on a broad and stable saddleback of normality. Physiologically, neural normality reflects a balance between excitatory and inhibitory systems in the brain, a balance which, in the absence of drugs or damage, has a remarkable latitude and resilience.
May 6, 2020
Wow! What a book! It took me a long time to finish from the moment I bought it in some random airport on my way to or from my cruise ship, until now. A big part of this was due to my slow reading habits, which turned out to be just a skill I managed to improve over a short period of time, which lead to finishing this book within the last week. As a result I'd like to state that I don't consider this a light read, as it's so full of information and amazing references. I discovered Oliver Sacks randomly on YouTube in 'Ode to the brain' where there was a snippet of his TED talk in which he says 'We see with the eyes, but we see with the brain as well. And what we see with the brain is often called imagination.' This totally captivated me and I was delighted to find a book of his on a shelf at random; I didn't immediately recognize the name, but the portrait at the back cover I did immediately. Now I will surely never forget his name. On a sadder note, this book, although my first read of his, was his last writing up to 2015 when he passed away after a fight with metastatic liver cancer. This book was published 2 years after his death, in 2017 (or at least the version I have). The man had a vast mind and explored ideas and shared wanderings in a relatively old-fashioned and 'thick' way, that may not have an immediate appeal to readers of the 21st century. However the book has many wow moments for people who don't study these things academically, from talks of Darwin, to Newton, to Einstein, to consciousness, various other pioneers in their fields, and the very evolution of science, as well as the perception of the creative genius. The book explores a lot, therefore expect to have a lot to take in and ruminate over. Although I have literature through which I speed read, this is something I definitely wouldn't consider something to speed read through. I look forward to explore other books of his.
February 5, 2022
Fairly light, good for bedtime reading.
May 29, 2024
I enjoyed this series of essays -- it covers a wide range of topics that all describe different ways that our brains work. For example, he talks about some patients who have different perceptions of time - one elderly woman on dopamine becomes a super speedy table tennis server, beating much younger people. Another patient appears to hold a "frozen pose" and when confronted states, "I was scratching my nose!" Sure enough, Dr Sacks sets up a time lapse camera and the man is moving almost imperceptibly slowly to scratch his nose but left on is own, his perception of speed of his movement and time is out of sync with the rest of us.
He talks about how people first started describing their perception of reality as frames of photos -- and the fascination people had with the zoetrope. The sense that time slows down when you have a fall or a crash of some sort -- you come up with all sorts of things at once and the actual fall feels like it moves much slower.
The brain is super at rewiring -- you can create new memories and beliefs just by repeating them over and over. He uses an example of Ronald Reagan describing a scene in a film as an actual event -- but I'm sure we can all come up with more (not just recovered trauma). There's so much we don't know about the way we perceive reality, time and events -- our brains and bodies are so specific to what we are doing now (like learning to perceive time as non-linear in by Ted Chiang).
Really enjoyable as an audio book - don't believe everything you think!
He talks about how people first started describing their perception of reality as frames of photos -- and the fascination people had with the zoetrope. The sense that time slows down when you have a fall or a crash of some sort -- you come up with all sorts of things at once and the actual fall feels like it moves much slower.
The brain is super at rewiring -- you can create new memories and beliefs just by repeating them over and over. He uses an example of Ronald Reagan describing a scene in a film as an actual event -- but I'm sure we can all come up with more (not just recovered trauma). There's so much we don't know about the way we perceive reality, time and events -- our brains and bodies are so specific to what we are doing now (like learning to perceive time as non-linear in by Ted Chiang).
Really enjoyable as an audio book - don't believe everything you think!
December 13, 2017
A highly interesting, multifaceted essay collection. Sacks's magpie mind is well-represented here, a series of essays that discuss more than their subject matter without ever getting too arcane. Fascinating to read about Freud's evolution from neurology to psychotherapy, or the nature of visual consciousness, or to consider what Sacks calls "Scotoma"—dark spots in the field of vision—in scientific knowledge. And underneath all of those explorations, a deep joy in the possibilities of creation, evolution, and art. Sacks says:
I'll miss his thoughts in the world.
There is no way by which the events of the world can be directly transmitted or recorded in our brains; they are experienced and constructed in a highly subjective way, which is different in every individual to begin with, and differently reinterpreted or reexperienced whenever they are recollected. Our only truth is narrative truth, the stories we tell each other and ourselves—the stories we continually recategorize and refine. Such subjectivity is built into the very nature of memory and follows from its basis and mechanisms in the brains we have.
I'll miss his thoughts in the world.
May 23, 2018
Some of the most famous scientists explained by one of them. Darwin,Freud, James and Poincaré told by Sacks and some other informations about Edelmann and consciousness in the chapter that gives the title to the book. Prof. Sacks you are deeply missed.
Alcuni degli scienziati piú famosi e delle loro scoperte, raccontati da uno di loro. Darwin, Freud, James e Poincaré piú alcune ulteriori informazioni su Edelmann e la coscienza nel capitolo che da il titolo al libro. Prof. Sacks quanto ci manchi!
THANKS TO EDELWEISS FOR THE PREVIEW!
Alcuni degli scienziati piú famosi e delle loro scoperte, raccontati da uno di loro. Darwin, Freud, James e Poincaré piú alcune ulteriori informazioni su Edelmann e la coscienza nel capitolo che da il titolo al libro. Prof. Sacks quanto ci manchi!
THANKS TO EDELWEISS FOR THE PREVIEW!
December 17, 2017
Oliver Sacks is the most approachable genius one could encounter while studying the human brain and its behaviors. This book is sublime.
January 15, 2019
This man has such a wonderful way of describing the ways of the Mind and body.
June 3, 2018
Coscienza a largo raggio.
April 23, 2020
I fear this was not his best. I still enjoyed it. He's like that annoying friend who knows everything and talks non-stop. You can't help but to listen to him talking and enjoy 😂.
January 10, 2025
This was my first time reading Sacks and it was pretty close to what I was expecting; engaging anecdotes tied to scientific phenomena that would otherwise be over my head. Some of the jargon can still be a bit difficult to understand but I enjoyed Sacks's writing style and curiosity. Will likely tackle Musicophilia next...
June 21, 2021
O colectie de zece eseuri, mai mult sau mai putin legate.
Un fir narativ ar fi istoria cercetarii constiintei:
Cartea se deschide cu studiile lui Charles Darwin pe plantele cataratoare. Acestea pare ca se folosesc de indicii din mediul exterior pentru a se orienta. In ultima sa carte, "Formarea
humusului sub actiunea ramelor", Darwin a observat "calitati mentale" in comportamentul ramelor.
Freud s-a ocupat cu studiul sistemului nervos al nevertebratelor, "si a inteles, ca nimeni pana atunci, ca neuronul este unitatea de semnalizare a sistemului nervos". Daca ar fi ramas in cercetare ar fi fost probabil cunoscut azi drept cofondatorul teoriei neuronale." Asta da cariera ratata. In schimb ne multumim cu teoria non-falsificabila, si prin urmare nestiintifica, a psihanalizei.
Cel mai important eseu este cel care da titlul cartii. Se bazeaza pe studiile cele mai recente care stabilesc baza neuronala a constiintei.
Deoarece constiinta are o baza neuronala, nu trebuie uitat un fapt: constiinta este produsul evolutiei prin selectie naturala. "Nimic in biologie nu are sens decat in lumina evolutiei" Theodosius Dobzhansky (pg 29). A devenit citatul meu preferat.
Un fir narativ ar fi istoria cercetarii constiintei:
Cartea se deschide cu studiile lui Charles Darwin pe plantele cataratoare. Acestea pare ca se folosesc de indicii din mediul exterior pentru a se orienta. In ultima sa carte, "Formarea
humusului sub actiunea ramelor", Darwin a observat "calitati mentale" in comportamentul ramelor.
Freud s-a ocupat cu studiul sistemului nervos al nevertebratelor, "si a inteles, ca nimeni pana atunci, ca neuronul este unitatea de semnalizare a sistemului nervos". Daca ar fi ramas in cercetare ar fi fost probabil cunoscut azi drept cofondatorul teoriei neuronale." Asta da cariera ratata. In schimb ne multumim cu teoria non-falsificabila, si prin urmare nestiintifica, a psihanalizei.
Cel mai important eseu este cel care da titlul cartii. Se bazeaza pe studiile cele mai recente care stabilesc baza neuronala a constiintei.
Deoarece constiinta are o baza neuronala, nu trebuie uitat un fapt: constiinta este produsul evolutiei prin selectie naturala. "Nimic in biologie nu are sens decat in lumina evolutiei" Theodosius Dobzhansky (pg 29). A devenit citatul meu preferat.
September 5, 2020
Otro libro fascinante de Oliver Sacks, quien esta vez llega un poco mas lejos que en sus libros anteriores, explorando con su acostumbrada y alegre curiosidad el nivel consciente y subconsciente no solo de los seres humanos, sino de algunos animales mal llamados inferiores, como la lombriz de tierra, y hasta de las plantas......Hay capítulos en el libro que he leido casi sin poder respirar y ardiendo de auforia: Un análisis de los primeros veinte años de la vida profesional de Sigmund Freud dedicados completamente a la neurología y al funcionamiento mecánico del cerebro y en los cuales escribió libros y tratados que nada tuvieron que ver con la mente, pero que de por si hubieran sido suficientes para darle un lugar en la historia de la medicina(un tratado acerca de la Afasia, otro acerca de la parálisis cerebral, por ejemplo)....Pero en el capítulo en el cual habla de como la mente cambia su percepción del tiempo según las influencias ambientales y varias enfermedades psiquiátricas me dejo casi muerto!!
March 31, 2023
Fluviul Constiintei - Oliver Sacks.
Am extras din aceasta carte cateva paragrafe care va pot face sa o cititi sau nu, dar si sa va faceti o idee despre temele prezentate, dezbatute si aprofundate:
Dar Sprengel a ratat secretul ultim, desi s-a apropiat de el, dearece era înca legat de idea linnaean ca florile se autofecundeaza si considera florile de aceeasi specie ca find esentialmente identice, Aici a facut Darwin bresa radicala si a scos la iveala secretul florilor, aratând cum caracteristicile lor speciale - diverse modele, culori, forme, nectaruri si arome prin care atrag insectele ca sa zboare repede din floare in floare, si mijloacele prin care se asigurau ca insectele vor aduna polen Inainte de a pleca de pe floare - erau toate „dispozitive", dupa cum formula el; toate evoluasera in serviciul fertilizarii încrucisate.
Ceea ce fusese cândva o imagine frumoasa cu insecte bâzaind printre flori viu colorate devenise acum o drama esentiala a vietii, plina de semnificatii si profunzimi biologice. Culorile si mirosurile florilor erau adaptate simturilor insectelor, in vreme ce albinele sunt atrase de flori albastre si galbene, le ignora pe cele rosii, findca e o culoare pe care nu o disting. Pe de alta parte, capacitatea lor de a vedea dincolo de violet este exploatata de flori, care utilizeaza marcaje in ultraviolet, ghidaje care conduc albinele spre glandele care secreta nectarul. Fluturii, care vad bine rosul, fertilizeaza florile rosii, dar le pot ignora pe cele albastre sau violete. Florile polenizate de fluturii de noapte tind sa nu fie colorate, dar isi raspândesc parfumul noaptea. lar florile polenizate de muste, care traies pe materia in putrefactie, pot imita mirosurile fetide (pentru noi) ale carnii in descompunere.
La un nivel superior, Freud vedea memoria si motivatia ca inseparabile. Rememorarea nu putea avea nici o forta, niciun inteles, decât daca se alia cu motivatia. Cele doua trebuiau intotdeauna asociate, iar in Proiect, asa cum subliniaza Pribram si Gill, „atât memoria, cât si motivatia sunt procese psi bazate pe facilitare selectiva [...] amintirile [find] aspectul retrospectiv al acestor facilitari, iar motivatiile, aspectul prospectiv".6*
*6. Inseparabilitatea amintirii si a motivului, a aratat Freud, deschides posibilitatea de a intelege anumite iluzii ale memoriei pe baza intentionalitatii: iluzia ca ai scris unei persoane, de exemplu, când nu ai facut-o, dar ai intentionat, sau ca ai umplut cada cu apa când de fapt doar voi sa o faci. Nu avem astfel de iluzii decât dacã a existat o intentie care sa le preceada.
De la o astfel de constiinta primara relativ simpla, sarim la constiinta umana, odata cu aparitia limbajului si constiintei de sine, precum si a unui simt explicit al trecutului si vitorului. Si tocmai asta confer continuitate tematica si personala constintei fiecarui individ. Scriu aceste rânduri asezat la o cafenea pe Seventh Avenue, privind cum trece lumea pe lânga mine. Atentia mea sare de la una la alta: o fata in rochie rosie, un barbat care plimba un câine caraghios, soarele (in sfârsit!) iesind din nori. Dar exist si senzatii care par sa vina singure: Zgomotul unui rateu de esapament, mirosul de fum de la un vecin care si-a aprins o tigara contra vântului. Toate acestea sunt evenimente care-mi capteaza pentru un moment atentia in timp ce se desfasoara. De ce, din mii de perceptii posibile, le detectez tocmai pe acestea? Dincolo de ele sunt reflectii, amintiri, asocieri. Deoarece constiinta e mereu activa si selectiva - incarcata cu sentimente si intelesuri unice pentru noi, influentandu-ne alegerile si impregnându-ne perceptiile. Asadar, nu vad doar bulevardul Seventh Avenue, ci Seventh Avenue al meu, marcat de propriul meu sine si propria mea identitate.
Dar ne pacalim singuri daca ne imaginam ca putem fi vreodata observatori pasivi, impartiali. Fiecare perceptie, fiecare scena este formata de noi, fie ca intentionam sau o stim, fie ca nu. Suntem regizorii filmului nostru - dar suntem si subiectii lui: fiecare cadru, fiecare moment, suntem noi, sunt ale noastre. Dar atunci cum se tin impreuna cadrele noastre, momentele individuale? Cum, daca totul e tranzitoriu, obtinem continuitate?
Asadar finta noastra nu e constituita doar de momentele perceptuale, simplele momente fiziologice - desi acestea alcatuiesc fundamentul -, ci de momente de un tip eminamente personal. In cele din urma, deci, ajungem la viziunea lui Proust, amintind ea insasi putin de o fotografie, ca suntem alcatuiti in intregime dintr-o „colectie de momente", chiar daca acestea curg unul in altul, ca râul lui Borges.
Dar Einstein s-a straduit de asemenea sa sublimieze ca o /teorie noua nu o invalideaza sau înlatura pe cea veche, ci mai degraba „ne permite sa recapatam vechile concepte la un nivel superior". A extins aceasta idee într-o comparatie faimoasa:
"Folosind o comparatie, putem spune ca crearea unei noi teorii nu este asemanatoare cu distrugerea unui sopron vechi si ridicarea in locul lui a unui zgârie-nori. Ea se aseamana mai degraba cu o ascensiune pe munte, in cursul careia perspectiva se schimba si se largeste necontenit, dându-ne prilejul sa descoperim legaturi neasteptate intre punctul nostru de plecare si împrejurimile lui bogate. Dar locul de unde am plecat nu va înceta sa existe si se va zari înca de pe culme; el va parea insa mult mai mic, repre-zentand doar o particica neînsemnata din larga priveliste pe care ne-am cucerit-o invingând obstacolele ivite de-a lungul urcusului nostru plin de peripetii."
Am extras din aceasta carte cateva paragrafe care va pot face sa o cititi sau nu, dar si sa va faceti o idee despre temele prezentate, dezbatute si aprofundate:
Dar Sprengel a ratat secretul ultim, desi s-a apropiat de el, dearece era înca legat de idea linnaean ca florile se autofecundeaza si considera florile de aceeasi specie ca find esentialmente identice, Aici a facut Darwin bresa radicala si a scos la iveala secretul florilor, aratând cum caracteristicile lor speciale - diverse modele, culori, forme, nectaruri si arome prin care atrag insectele ca sa zboare repede din floare in floare, si mijloacele prin care se asigurau ca insectele vor aduna polen Inainte de a pleca de pe floare - erau toate „dispozitive", dupa cum formula el; toate evoluasera in serviciul fertilizarii încrucisate.
Ceea ce fusese cândva o imagine frumoasa cu insecte bâzaind printre flori viu colorate devenise acum o drama esentiala a vietii, plina de semnificatii si profunzimi biologice. Culorile si mirosurile florilor erau adaptate simturilor insectelor, in vreme ce albinele sunt atrase de flori albastre si galbene, le ignora pe cele rosii, findca e o culoare pe care nu o disting. Pe de alta parte, capacitatea lor de a vedea dincolo de violet este exploatata de flori, care utilizeaza marcaje in ultraviolet, ghidaje care conduc albinele spre glandele care secreta nectarul. Fluturii, care vad bine rosul, fertilizeaza florile rosii, dar le pot ignora pe cele albastre sau violete. Florile polenizate de fluturii de noapte tind sa nu fie colorate, dar isi raspândesc parfumul noaptea. lar florile polenizate de muste, care traies pe materia in putrefactie, pot imita mirosurile fetide (pentru noi) ale carnii in descompunere.
La un nivel superior, Freud vedea memoria si motivatia ca inseparabile. Rememorarea nu putea avea nici o forta, niciun inteles, decât daca se alia cu motivatia. Cele doua trebuiau intotdeauna asociate, iar in Proiect, asa cum subliniaza Pribram si Gill, „atât memoria, cât si motivatia sunt procese psi bazate pe facilitare selectiva [...] amintirile [find] aspectul retrospectiv al acestor facilitari, iar motivatiile, aspectul prospectiv".6*
*6. Inseparabilitatea amintirii si a motivului, a aratat Freud, deschides posibilitatea de a intelege anumite iluzii ale memoriei pe baza intentionalitatii: iluzia ca ai scris unei persoane, de exemplu, când nu ai facut-o, dar ai intentionat, sau ca ai umplut cada cu apa când de fapt doar voi sa o faci. Nu avem astfel de iluzii decât dacã a existat o intentie care sa le preceada.
De la o astfel de constiinta primara relativ simpla, sarim la constiinta umana, odata cu aparitia limbajului si constiintei de sine, precum si a unui simt explicit al trecutului si vitorului. Si tocmai asta confer continuitate tematica si personala constintei fiecarui individ. Scriu aceste rânduri asezat la o cafenea pe Seventh Avenue, privind cum trece lumea pe lânga mine. Atentia mea sare de la una la alta: o fata in rochie rosie, un barbat care plimba un câine caraghios, soarele (in sfârsit!) iesind din nori. Dar exist si senzatii care par sa vina singure: Zgomotul unui rateu de esapament, mirosul de fum de la un vecin care si-a aprins o tigara contra vântului. Toate acestea sunt evenimente care-mi capteaza pentru un moment atentia in timp ce se desfasoara. De ce, din mii de perceptii posibile, le detectez tocmai pe acestea? Dincolo de ele sunt reflectii, amintiri, asocieri. Deoarece constiinta e mereu activa si selectiva - incarcata cu sentimente si intelesuri unice pentru noi, influentandu-ne alegerile si impregnându-ne perceptiile. Asadar, nu vad doar bulevardul Seventh Avenue, ci Seventh Avenue al meu, marcat de propriul meu sine si propria mea identitate.
Dar ne pacalim singuri daca ne imaginam ca putem fi vreodata observatori pasivi, impartiali. Fiecare perceptie, fiecare scena este formata de noi, fie ca intentionam sau o stim, fie ca nu. Suntem regizorii filmului nostru - dar suntem si subiectii lui: fiecare cadru, fiecare moment, suntem noi, sunt ale noastre. Dar atunci cum se tin impreuna cadrele noastre, momentele individuale? Cum, daca totul e tranzitoriu, obtinem continuitate?
Asadar finta noastra nu e constituita doar de momentele perceptuale, simplele momente fiziologice - desi acestea alcatuiesc fundamentul -, ci de momente de un tip eminamente personal. In cele din urma, deci, ajungem la viziunea lui Proust, amintind ea insasi putin de o fotografie, ca suntem alcatuiti in intregime dintr-o „colectie de momente", chiar daca acestea curg unul in altul, ca râul lui Borges.
Dar Einstein s-a straduit de asemenea sa sublimieze ca o /teorie noua nu o invalideaza sau înlatura pe cea veche, ci mai degraba „ne permite sa recapatam vechile concepte la un nivel superior". A extins aceasta idee într-o comparatie faimoasa:
"Folosind o comparatie, putem spune ca crearea unei noi teorii nu este asemanatoare cu distrugerea unui sopron vechi si ridicarea in locul lui a unui zgârie-nori. Ea se aseamana mai degraba cu o ascensiune pe munte, in cursul careia perspectiva se schimba si se largeste necontenit, dându-ne prilejul sa descoperim legaturi neasteptate intre punctul nostru de plecare si împrejurimile lui bogate. Dar locul de unde am plecat nu va înceta sa existe si se va zari înca de pe culme; el va parea insa mult mai mic, repre-zentand doar o particica neînsemnata din larga priveliste pe care ne-am cucerit-o invingând obstacolele ivite de-a lungul urcusului nostru plin de peripetii."
April 14, 2024
Continuo a percorrere il sentiero attraverso il bosco degli scritti di sacks, anche grazie a personcine carine che mi regalano libri di cui ancora non conoscevo l'esistenza. Una serie di brevi essays, a quanto pare l'ultima, piacevoli ed interessanti, come sempre.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 748 reviews