Goodreads helps you keep track of books you want to read.

Start by marking “How the Mind Works” as Want to Read:

Other editions

Enlarge cover

Rate this book

Clear rating

1 of 5 stars 2 of 5 stars 3 of 5 stars 4 of 5 stars 5 of 5 stars

Open Preview

How the Mind Works

Steven Pinker (Goodreads Author)

3.98 · Rating details · 18,562 ratings · 584 reviews

In this extraordinary bestseller, Steven Pinker, one of the world's leading cognitive scientists, does for the rest of the mind what he did for language in his 1994 book, The Language Instinct. He explains what the mind is, how it evolved, and how it allows us to see, think, feel, laugh, interact, enjoy the arts, and ponder the mysteries of life. And he does it with the wi ...more

Get A Copy

Paperback, 660 pages

Published January 17th 1999 by W. W. Norton Company (first published 1997)

More Details... Edit Details

Friend Reviews

To see what your friends thought of this book, please sign up.

Reader Q&A

To ask other readers questions about How the Mind Works, please sign up.

Lists with This Book

A Short History of Nearly Everything by Bill Bryson

A Brief History of Time by Stephen Hawking

Best Science Books - Non-Fiction Only

1,585 books — 3,529 voters

Thinking, Fast and Slow by Daniel Kahneman

The Man Who Mistook His Wife for a Hat and Other Clinical Tales by Oliver Sacks

Best Cognitive Science Books

318 books — 501 voters

More lists with this book...

Community Reviews

Showing 1-30

Average rating 3.98 ·

Rating details

· 18,562 ratings · 584 reviews

More filters

Sort order

Start your review of How the Mind Works

Apr 16, 2010 Kalliope rated it really liked it · review of another edition

Shelves: popular-science

This morning while swimming I thought of this book. And I thought also of a conversation I had recently with a friend. We were talking about human consciousness.

Swimming is a perfect thing to do when thinking about consciousness. While sliding along the water we are deprived of many things, in particular of the full powers of our senses. There is very little to hear; smellandtaste are also kept at bay; what we can look at is reduced to a wall and a straight line on the floor of the pool; and the ...more

flag 108 likes · Like · see review

Jul 19, 2011 Mikael Lind rated it it was ok

Shelves: cognitive-science

The book does not lack good qualities, but I generally dislike the technique of argumentation that is too often characterized by poor proof backed by a certain arrogance towards alternative explanations. The chapter on the sexes is particularly shoddily presented. The "proof" that Pinker refers to when trying to back his claims that (simply put) evolution and innateness alone explain the differences between the sexes when it comes to attitudes to sex (the male hunter/gatherer has logically a gre ...more

flag 63 likes · Like · see review

Apr 07, 2017 Chrissie rated it did not like it

Shelves: not-for-me, disliked, returned, philo-psychol, audible, dnf

I started this, listened to 3.5 hours of the audiobook’s total of 26 and simply couldn’t imagine continuing. The first chapter (2.5 hours), which the author calls an “opening brief”, can in simple terms be seen as an introduction. This introduction was not concise; it was rambling and consisted of mundane generalizations. It did not clarify how the book would be organized nor in precise terms what the author wished to show. Nothing enticed me to continue.

To better understand the field of cognit I started this, listened to 3.5 hours of the audiobook’s total of 26 and simply couldn’t imagine continuing. The first chapter (2.5 hours), which the author calls an “opening brief”, can in simple terms be seen as an introduction. This introduction was not concise; it was rambling and consisted of mundane generalizations. It did not clarify how the book would be organized nor in precise terms what the author wished to show. Nothing enticed me to continue.

To better understand the field of cognitive science I am looking for a book based on solid scientific backing, not one based on speculation. I want at least a modicum of solid proof for what is being claimed, and I found not one smidgeon of that here.

There was an excessive amount of criticism of other scientists’ views while at the same time the author’s own views were not made clear.

I disliked the manner in which the author gave an enormous number of examples which supposedly were meant to prove the generalizations made. Many examples proved nothing. They referred to movie figures, characters in fiction, objects we use in our daily life and further generalizations about human behavior. The list of examples drowned out the statement that was to be proven.

Even in the first introductory chapter there were statements made the validity of which can be debated. We are told that humans today no longer worry about robots / computer programs being made that function better than man. That is not true! In the news recently was a debate about the inequitable use of artificial intelligence programs.

So I finished the unwieldy, long-winded, empty first introductory chapter and moved on to the second. Before quitting the book I wanted to check if perhaps the style of writing altered. It did not.

The narration by Mel Foster started off too fast, but I got used to it. At one point I set the speed down to 75%, and that was too slow! Sentences become distorted. In a book such as this a listener needs time to consider what is being said so they can themselves evaluate what they are being told.

The rambling, chatty writing style, the multitude of generalizations and the lack of both conclusive evidence and scientific backing are not what I am looking for. If I do not want to read a book, this says clearly that I did not like that which I read. I am giving this one star. ...more

flag 41 likes · Like · see review

Mar 17, 2010 David rated it it was amazing

Shelves: philosophy, psychology, science, biology, religion

This is a truly comprehensive treatment of the human mind. Pinker delves deeply into the reasons why the mind has evolved to make decisions in the way it does. There is very little discussion about the biology of the brain; the book points out that a good understanding of the origins of human behavior requires descriptions at a higher level--at the level of the mind, and how it evolved through natural selection. Pinker shows how natural selection has worked its way into every nook and cranny of ...more

flag 30 likes · Like · see review

Aug 21, 2008 Joshua Nomen-Mutatio rated it it was amazing

Shelves: cognitive-science-and-or-psychology, evolutionary-theory, neuroscience

I think this a great way of addressing a widespread misunderstanding about genetics, biological evolution and human thought & behavior.

Slight background story: I was having a discussion with a guy on goodreads.com within his comments on his review of Why I Am Not A Muslim and eventually it came to this:

Myself: "It’s a categorical mistake to think this about biological evolution. To put it bluntly: our genes are selfish, but we are not (not necessarily, unconditionally so at least)."

Him: "One las ...more

flag 28 likes · Like · see review

Sep 29, 2010 Josh Hamacher rated it liked it

I finally finished this book. It took me far longer than I care to admit to do so. On at least one occasion I lost interest and put it down for several weeks before coming back to it.

I have a hard time putting my finger on exactly why this was the case. It's not that it's bad - in fact, parts of it are absolutely fascinating. It's certainly not the writing; Pinker is quite good (despite a tendency to repeat himself frequently).

I think it boiled down to two things for me, with both of them being ...more

flag 17 likes · Like · see review

Apr 22, 2017 Amirography rated it it was amazing · review of another edition

Shelves: cognitive-science, philosophy, favorites

This book was an amazing read!
I cannot get around the fact that it was written by one person, let alone one person with a lot of other books on the same topic, and yet more provocative each time.

I loved the detailed and comprehensive outlook on each subject matter.

It is not a textbook, It is a long essay that gives you a rational, up-to-date, coherent, general yet accurate, A frame for thinking about mind, cognition, and emotions, and also changes our day-to-day worldview about people in genera ...more

flag 14 likes · Like · see review

Aug 30, 2012 Michael rated it it was amazing

Shelves: philosophy, non-fiction, psychology, neuroscience

This is a very readable and influential synthesis of the cognitive science view of the mind with that of evolutionary psychology. The overall thrust is that the mind is a neural computer closely governed by feelings and desires that were shaped by natural selection for their adaptive value in the hunter-gatherer lifestyle of our ancestors. The book is lively, with lots of down to earth examples. He holds your hand when wading through many technical subjects, faces disputes in a non-dogmatic way, This is a very readable and influential synthesis of the cognitive science view of the mind with that of evolutionary psychology. The overall thrust is that the mind is a neural computer closely governed by feelings and desires that were shaped by natural selection for their adaptive value in the hunter-gatherer lifestyle of our ancestors. The book is lively, with lots of down to earth examples. He holds your hand when wading through many technical subjects, faces disputes in a non-dogmatic way, and addresses political spins on scientific matters in a forthright way.

The heft and scope of the volume is daunting. Yet it is written to be accessible to the general reader as well as scholars. As the emphasis is on synthesis and not a unifying novel theory of mind dependent on the cohesion of all its parts, I feel that the average reader could benefit from reading only the chapters of interest to them. There are sections on visual perception, neural network modeling, passionate emotions, social behaviors, and cultural innovations. As with Wilson’s “Sociobiology”, many readers will be interested in what he has to say about biological roots of human violence, sexual behavior, family values, and the arts. This includes accounts of adaptive values for lying, self delusion, war, mass murder, rape, pornography, parent-child and sibling conflict, altruism, love, marriage, and friendship. Particularly fascinating is his coverage of the cross-cultural phenomenon of people going “amok” and tie-in with the “doomsday machine” theory of passionate emotions, the adaptive value of which lies in their service as “guarantors of threats and promises”.

He makes a good argument that thinking conforms to a kind of language, or mentalese, with categorical, syntactical, and generative properties aligned with Chomsky’s conceptions. He places a big emphasis on the role of beliefs and desires in his perspective on the core properties of human intellect. He doesn’t hold out much hope in the explanatory potential of neuroscience, considering models at that level an inadequate reductionism: "Even if neuroscientists someday decode the entire wiring diagram of the brain, human behavior makes the most sense when it was explained in terms of beliefs and desires, not in terms of volts and grams. Physics provides no insight into the machinations of a crafty lawyer, and even fails to enlighten us about many simpler acts of living things." I agree that explanations at the level physics will not help understand the mind, but I feel hopeful that neuroscience can make much progress in merging biological and psychological models. As this book was written in 2007, it misses the neurological synthesis of the computational and emotional aspects of the mind achieved by Damasio in his 2009 book and the decade of great ferment in cognitive neuroscience due to studies using Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging.

No matter how much it looks like he is on the pathway to biological determinism for so many “bad” human behaviors, he takes great pains to dissociate our inherited mental equipment from our systems of moral responsibility and vision of equal rights: "To understand is not to forgive". For example, understanding a human tendency to revile other cultures does not excuse the Holocaust. Biological determinism for even liberal values can be misguided, e.g. “The argument against persecuting gay people must be made not in terms of the gay gene or the gay brain but in terms of people’s right to engage in private consensual acts without discrimination or harassment.” In the case of the male tendency to mate with any women they can, even to the point of rape, rather than agreeing with one of his students that the key conclusion is that “Men are slime!”, he feels they still should be swayed by morality: “If … men are especially tempted to commit certain crimes against women, the implication is that deterrents should be surer and more severe, not that the crimes are somehow less odious.” Pinker further argues that environmental determinism is just as unfruitful. He feels feminists’ stance against discrimination and oppression of women can do without the position that their origin lies in brainwashing of children and youth by media, pornography, and child rearing and educational practices.

A refreshing aspect of Pinker’s book is that he makes very little claim to explaining free will and sentience. He also places a lot of advanced cultural accomplishments of humans, such as art, humor, and religion in a category of having no likely evolutionary adaptive value. He suspects that these capacities are “along for the ride” and that “human brains evolved by one set of laws, those of natural selection and genetics, and now interact with one another according to another set of laws, those of cognitive and social psychology, human ecology, and history”.
...more

flag 13 likes · Like · see review

May 04, 2010 Brad Acker rated it it was ok

This book frequently gets rave reviews. Whenever i sit down to read Pinker, i wish i were drinking again. Here is an example of a typical quotation from this book that i could only follow if i were drunk: "The cobalt 60 nucleus is said to spin counterclockwise if you look down on its north pole, but that description by itself is circular because 'north pole' is simply what we call the end of the axis from which a rotation looks counterclockwise." This is in the middle of a discussion, in which h ...more

flag 8 likes · Like · see review

Dec 23, 2013 Lewis Weinstein rated it did not like it

impenetrable, repetitive, useless ... did I say I was disappointed?

flag 8 likes · Like · see review

Jan 09, 2012 Erwin rated it really liked it

Very interesting. 20-30 years from now, I think most people will understand that there's nothing "magical" about the "mind", the "soul", religion, art, men, women, or any of the other sacred cows that continue to hold back humans from understanding themselves.

How the Mind Works was published back in 1997, but I didn't encounter any of the points that Pinker made in High School or Collage, up until 2000. Pinker focuses on a "computational theory of mind", saying that the mind is a complex paralle Very interesting. 20-30 years from now, I think most people will understand that there's nothing "magical" about the "mind", the "soul", religion, art, men, women, or any of the other sacred cows that continue to hold back humans from understanding themselves.

How the Mind Works was published back in 1997, but I didn't encounter any of the points that Pinker made in High School or Collage, up until 2000. Pinker focuses on a "computational theory of mind", saying that the mind is a complex parallel information processing system.

Of course Pinker doesn't have the "final word" on How the Mind Works, but he provides more evidence, more insight, and more rationality than the "romantics" and their leaders Freud Sigmund 1856-1939 Sigmund and Carl Jung.

Pinker continues on many of the themes here in The Blank Slate: The Modern Denial of Human Nature.

Unfortunately for Americans, Political Correctness seems to be a barrier to accurately seeing human nature, as human nature necessarily is different for different groups of people, particularly for men and women.

My favorite anecdote is about the "Coolidge effect":

… an old joke about Calvin Coolidge when he was President … The President and Mrs. Coolidge were being shown [separately] around an experimental government farm. When [Mrs. Coolidge] came to the chicken yard she noticed that a rooster was mating very frequently. She asked the attendant how often that happened and was told, “Dozens of times each day.” Mrs. Coolidge said, “Tell that to the President when he comes by.” Upon being told, President asked, “Same hen every time?” The reply was, “Oh, no, Mr. President, a different hen every time.” President: “Tell that to Mrs. Coolidge.”

Pinker explains the mind by "reverse-engineering" it—figuring out what natural selection designed it to accomplish in the environment in which we evolved. The mind, he writes, is a system of "organs of computation" that allowed our ancestors to understand and outsmart objects, animals, plants, and each other.

How the Mind Works explains many of the imponderables of everyday life. Why does a face look more attractive with makeup? How do "Magic-Eye" 3-D stereograms work? Why do we feel that a run of heads makes the coin more likely to land tails? Why is the thought of eating worms disgusting? Why do men challenge each other to duels and murder their ex-wives? Why are children bratty? Why do fools fall in love? Why are we soothed by paintings and music? And why do puzzles like the self, free will, and consciousness leave us dizzy?

This arguments in the book are as bold as its title. Pinker rehabilitates unfashionable ideas, such as that the mind is a computer and that human nature was shaped by natural selection. And he challenges fashionable ones, such as that passionate emotions are irrational, that parents socialize their children, that creativity springs from the unconscious, that nature is good and modern society corrupting, and that art and religion are expressions of our higher spiritual yearnings. ...more

flag 6 likes · Like · see review

Jul 03, 2018 Farha Crystal rated it liked it

Shelves: steven-pinker

What parts of the brain create awareness? Are we really aware of ourselves? Why has the mind evolved to make decisions in the way it does? why do we really laugh at a joke? Why does a face look more attractive with makeup? Why does our brain drive us to enjoy sex? Why is the thought of eating worms disgusting? Why do paintings and music alleviate the hunger and thurst of mind? Why did we invent religion, music and art? How did these items adapt in the long run if it serves to nothing from an evo ...more

flag 5 likes · Like · see review

Jul 16, 2009 Dawn rated it did not like it

Shelves: own, book-club-selection

Let's be honest. I will probably never pick up this book to finish it. I began reading this because of my book club. But, I didn't think I would finish it to begin with, and due to many circumstances, the book club will not be meeting for this book. So, I have decided to put it down as one of those books I'll never finish.

I didn't like most of what I read, not due to the subject/topic, but due to the way Pinker writes. His droning on on tangents and his shoving his philosophy, which is oh so rig ...more

flag 5 likes · Like · see review

Feb 05, 2008 Rita T rated it really liked it

Recommends it for: anyone who isn't a rabid Foucault acolyte

I read all bio-determinist arguments, no matter how sound their science, as a mandate to return to the 50's - those halcyon days when men schnoockered their secretaries while women bought canned foods and tended the young. Nonetheless, I loved this book. The early chapters, especially on the computational theory of mind, are incredible. Pinker is just unbelievably detailed and the linguistic spin he brings to the discussion of cognitive development is a great dimension. The later chapters are mo ...more

flag 5 likes · Like · see review

Sep 26, 2020 Harsh rated it really liked it · review of another edition

One star less cause I didn’t enjoy the format, in which the chapters are very very very big, and are divided in sub chapters that are related to each other through the main concept. This makes it harder to grasp the concept from a bird’s eye view, and makes it harder to continue reading. The content, language, style, and conclusion of the book are as good as one could hope for.

flag 4 likes · Like · see review

Dec 23, 2009 Nicholas Whyte added it

"http://nwhyte.livejournal.com/1289334.html[return][return]I was really disappointed by this book. Pinker starts out by claiming that he will explain the origins of human emotions, aesthetics, and belief in the context of the latest findings of evolutionary and psychological research. He does not really succeed in doing so. It is a succession of moderately interesting research reports, linked together with a glue of neat one-liners (mostly other people's), but without really coming to a killer c ...more

flag 4 likes · Like · see review

Aug 23, 2008 Joshua Stein rated it it was amazing

Recommended to Joshua by: Kent Anderson

Shelves: philosophy, mind

Pinker's treatise on the naturalist mind looks like a science textbook, but the combination of computer programming and physiology laid on top of sociological metaphors and applicable understandings makes it a fantastic read. His ability to diffuse archaic arguments about the nature of the mind without appearing argumentative is what defines him as a great academic, and his ability to explain things to individuals with only a high school education (like me) is what defines him as a great writer. ...more

flag 4 likes · Like · see review

Jun 28, 2012 Gendou rated it it was amazing

Shelves: non-fiction, biology

This book covers the computational theory of mind and evolutionary psychology. The former asserts that the mind is the computational product of the brain. The later examines how many aspects of human nature can be explained as biological adaptations. Both are crucial to understanding how the mind works. Both are explained in exquisite depth (read: this is a very long book).

Pinker gets one thing wrong at the end when he asserts what's known as the the "hard problem of consciousness" which his ref ...more

flag 4 likes · Like · see review

Apr 13, 2010 Nebuchadnezzar rated it liked it

Shelves: evolutionary-psychology, psychology-and-neuroscience, philosophy-of-mind

The title of the book should have read "How the Mind Works (According to Steven Pinker)." The picture he paints is not wrong, per se, but vastly overestimates the power of current cognitive modeling.

There is quite a bit of good material here reviewing computational theory of mind, modularity, evolutionary psychology, and related material in cognitive science written in Pinker's usual conversational style. However, I have to hop off the bandwagon at the halfway point on this one. Sure, computatio The title of the book should have read "How the Mind Works (According to Steven Pinker)." The picture he paints is not wrong, per se, but vastly overestimates the power of current cognitive modeling.

There is quite a bit of good material here reviewing computational theory of mind, modularity, evolutionary psychology, and related material in cognitive science written in Pinker's usual conversational style. However, I have to hop off the bandwagon at the halfway point on this one. Sure, computational theory of mind has produced a lot of fruitful research. The mind is, to some degree, modular. The brain, like all our other organs, is shaped by evolution. My main problem is in his jump from the modularity at "low-level" cognition (e.g., basic sensory input, certain parts of language) posited by Jerry A. Fodor to "massive modularity." There are some functions that are very localized in the brain that fit with modularity, but we would expect the brain to look very different if massive modularity were true. The brain is actually very plastic with many higher-order functions that aren't strictly localized. The same thing goes for his evolutionary explanations. I will happily agree that many cognitive systems and functions are adaptive -- having eyes and a visual system is obviously beneficial! When it comes to more complex social behaviors, we're in far more speculative territory.

As an introduction to cognitive science, it does present the material in an accessible way. However, it will be difficult to for the layperson to pick apart where Pinker's description is backed by solid evidence and where it lapses into questionable claims and rank speculation. There's a bit of fluff, too, especially near the end when it begins to cross over into the more overt political rambling characteristic of The Blank Slate: The Modern Denial of Human Nature.

Fodor's The Mind Doesn't Work That Way: The Scope and Limits of Computational Psychology (http://cogweb.ucla.edu/Abstracts/Fodo...) makes for a decent corrective, though I have problems with it as well. I'm in total agreement on one point with Fodor, though: When it comes to cognitive science, we're just getting started. ...more

flag 3 likes · Like · see review

Aug 29, 2015 The Laughing Man rated it it was amazing

Shelves: favorites

Pinker hits the bull's eye in this book debunking the ill arguments of the nurture front in the nature nurture debate, on his way relentlessly takes down feminism, noble savage theory, blank slate and on the side veganism a bit dealing crushing blows with solid arguments and facts. A must read for those interested in behavioral research and debunking the patchouli scented romantic arguments of the left. ...more

flag 3 likes · Like · see review

May 09, 2017 Cassandra Kay Silva rated it it was amazing

Shelves: science, psychology-sociology

Language provides a window into the history of society, but this book also helps show how it has both formed and is a part of our consciousness and our own experience. I think a huge range of people would enjoy this book for many many reasons. Perhaps the only genre that would struggle with it would be possibly the very religious. Otherwise pick it up and have a read you are going to love it!

flag 7 likes · Like · see review

Mar 03, 2018 Marcin Milkowski rated it it was ok

This book is way too long, and the last part (about philosophy) is fairly ill-informed. The most surprising thing is that cognitive psychology is limited to perception and the imagery debate; no discussion of memory, very limited discussion of reasoning, not to mention planning or motor planning. For today's standards, it's outdated by David Buss's text on evolutionary psychology. ...more

flag 3 likes · Like · see review

Jan 25, 2020 Steve Granger rated it really liked it

Excellent and comprehensive book as to be expected by the likes of Steven Pinker. Brought me back to my undergraduate days in psych. While any non-fiction science book suffers from the same uptake of advances in any field, Pinker did a great job at pulling together research that mostly lasts the test of time. Great read for anyone interested in the cross-over between biology and psychology.

flag 2 likes · Like · see review

May 21, 2018 Abu Hayat Khan rated it it was amazing

Shelves: steven-pinker

there is two contending interpretation exists among academia on Darwinian Evolution: Gradualism vs Punctuated Equilibrium. they strikingly disagree on the question of “how a phenotypic trait evolves”. in gradualism (Richard Dawkins and others), any phenotype must have an Adaptive value (here the definition of "adaptation" is very strict, it means reproductive advantage only) i.e. a trait that increases the chance for more living offspring evolves slowly through selection pressure. on the other h there is two contending interpretation exists among academia on Darwinian Evolution: Gradualism vs Punctuated Equilibrium. they strikingly disagree on the question of “how a phenotypic trait evolves”. in gradualism (Richard Dawkins and others), any phenotype must have an Adaptive value (here the definition of "adaptation" is very strict, it means reproductive advantage only) i.e. a trait that increases the chance for more living offspring evolves slowly through selection pressure. on the other hand, proponent of punctuated equilibrium (Steven J Gould and other) don’t accept the idea of “adaptation”, rather they theorized something called“Exaptation”, which says that a trait may arise through natural selection for one purpose but later organism may find another way to use it which doesn’t give any survival value (i.e. doesn’t provide reproductive advantage). such traits or phenotypes are called evolutionary byproduct. Mr. Gould’s called them “Spandrel”. Spandrels of San Marco are famous for their beautiful art, but originally these spandrels were structural components of the basilica which later turned into artistic masterpieces.

Unlike slow Adaptation, Exaptation happens in punctuated manner, i.e. out of sudden in the geological timescale. Epigenetics is considered to be one of the mechanisms for such punctuated evolution (please see, "Behave: The Biology of Humans at Our Best and Worst" by Robert M. Sapolsky).

if we consider human mind as a phenotype that comes from an organ called the brain, and if the brain is an evolved organ through natural selection, which interpretation should we take to explain human mind? is mind adaptive? a trait that helps multiplying offspring? Or is mind exaptative, i.e. an evolutionary byproduct?

in his influential book "Thinking, Fast and Slow", Daniel Kahneman demonstrated that human mind is by default irrational, rational thinking is a very expensive process hence turned off most of the time. instead, our brain uses shortcuts, know as heuristics or biases to solve any given situation. this line of research and academic findings tipped the view of human mind toward exaptationism. i.e. prominent view is that human mind is an evolutionary byproduct which explains why it is such irrational. in this view, it is considered that human mind was evolved to survive in predator-prey paradigm in which rational thinking would result in predation and death. our concept of art, music, language, etc is simply a byproduct of a formal survival machine called the brain.

now enters Steven Pinker. Mr. Pinker argued that mind is an adaptive phenotype. so the only way to understand it is through evolutionary history not by chaos theory or reductionist physical approach. which implies that the irrational throughs are not useless at all. rather our cognition biases and irrationalities are very important to increase the change of our reproductive success. and that is exactly how human mind should work.

I consider Steven Pinker and Gerard Diamond as the best two scientific writer of our time. other writers like Yuval Noah Harari, Richard Dawkins etc are popular but not even close to these two giants. in this book, Mr. Pinker destroyed exaptationism, though not without criticism. some of his descriptions just flown over my head, nonetheless, this book turns out to be the most informative book on evolution I've ever read. ...more

flag 2 likes · Like · see review

Nov 18, 2015 Teo 2050 rated it it was amazing

Shelves: by_psychologist, _nonfiction, y15q4, neuro, misc_metaphor-analogy, consciousness, perception, affective-valence, lib_edge-org, _audio

2015.11.18–2015.11.23

Contents

Pinker S (1997) (26:09) How the Mind Works

Preface

1. Standard Equipment
• The Robot Challenge
• Reverse-Engineering the Psyche
• Psychological Correctness

2. Thinking Machines
• The Search for Intelligent Life in the Universe
• Natural Computation
• The Defending Champion
• Connectoplasm
• Aladdin's Lamp

3. Revenge of the Nerds
• Get Smart
• Life's Designer
• The Blind Programmer
• Instinct and Intelligence
• The Cognitive Niche
• Why Us?
• What Now?

4. The Mind's Eye
• Deep Eye
• Lighti ...more

flag 2 likes · Like · see review

Jul 21, 2012 Ben rated it really liked it

A very good book, albeit not the quickest read ever.

I’ve read a few popular science books and have been disappointed when they seem to rely more on anecdote than science -- ok, fine, what I really mean is I can’t stand Malcolm Gladwell. How the Mind Works certainly feels much more solidly founded in science while still maintaining the how-science-fits-into-real-life perspective of a popular science book.

It’s not a perfect book. Given the enormous breadth of the topic that Pinker is attempting to ...more

flag 2 likes · Like · see review

Dec 05, 2010 Deniz Cem Önduygu rated it it was amazing · review of another edition

Recommends it for: social scientists

Shelves: science, philosophy, biology, favorites, mind

So many great paragraphs that they make up for a few places where he gets lazy and spells out conventions. As the number of notes I took goes, this book is a winner; in addition to all its original content, it has the best summaries I've encountered of many complex ideas/theories. He is remarkably devastating against standart social sciences and postmodernist thinking.

The book may get a little monotone in the technical chapters, but it's a must-read for anyone interested in psychology, evolutio ...more

flag 2 likes · Like · see review

Jan 20, 2013 Ryan rated it really liked it · review of another edition

Recommends it for: those with persistent intellectual curiosity

In order to understand ourselves and others in a meaningful and accurate way, we need to be informed on how the human mind works. Steven Pinker lucidly explains what we can know about how the mind works and why it happens to work the way it does. The explanations he presents are supported by fascinating experiments and observations from the fields of psychology, neuroscience, biology and anthropology.

Reading this book requires a fair bit of grinding, but I think that some people who persist will ...more

flag 2 likes · Like · see review

Sep 07, 2011 Paul Perry rated it it was amazing · review of another edition

Shelves: science, non-fiction, read-in-2012, re-read, read-in-2015, male-author, psychology, evolution, mind

The best science writers have an understanding of the subject on which they write that is both deep and broad along with the ability to express these ideas in a way which is both clear and connects it with ideas and experiences that resonate with the general reader. Pinker is, along with Brian Greene and Sean Carroll in physics and Steve Jones and Richard Dawkins in biology, amongst the very finest of these.

flag 2 likes · Like · see review

Nov 09, 2013 David rated it liked it · review of another edition

Shelves: non-fiction, science, linguistics, doorstopper, owned

It's been years since I've read this, so I don't reliably remember all the arguments in Pinker's book. I remember finding it very interesting at the time, but since then, I've become a lot more skeptical about evolutionary psychology.

I'm not actually sure that I read the whole thing, considering I can't remember much of it... ...more

flag 2 likes · Like · see review

« previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 … next »

new topic
Discuss This Book

topics	posts	views	last activity
Genre: Cognitive Science should be within Neuroscience	2	5	Mar 30, 2020 12:16PM
the mind	1	9	Jul 03, 2013 02:27AM
Science and Inquiry: August 2012 - How the Mind Works	152	207	Nov 23, 2012 10:38PM

Readers also enjoyed

See similar books…

Videos About This Book

Steven Pinker: A brief history of violence

Add a comment

Genres

Psychology

1,008 users

Science

895 users

Nonfiction

747 users

Biology > Neuroscience

189 users

Philosophy

164 users

Neuroscience > Brain

76 users

Science > Biology

72 users

Science > Popular Science

54 users

Biology > Evolution

53 users

Humanities > Linguistics

37 users

See top shelves…

About Steven Pinker

Steven Pinker

7,402 followers

Steven Arthur Pinker is a prominent Canadian-American experimental psychologist, cognitive scientist, and author of popular science. Pinker is known for his wide-ranging explorations of human nature and its relevance to language, history, morality, politics, and everyday life. He conducts research on language and cognition, writes for publications such as the New York Times, Time, and The New Repu ...more

Books by Steven Pinker

The Blank Slate: The Modern Denial of Human Nature

The Language Instinct: How the Mind Creates Language

Enlightenment Now: The Case for Reason, Science, Humanism, and Progress

The Better Angels of Our Nature: Why Violence Has Declined

The Stuff of Thought: Language as a Window into Human Nature

More…

Astrophysicist Neil deGrasse Tyson Shares His Reading Recommendations

For more than a decade, Neil deGrasse Tyson, the world-renowned astrophysicist and host of the popular radio and Emmy-nominated...

Trivia About How the Mind Works

No trivia or quizzes yet. Add some now »

Quotes from How the Mind Works

“Just as blueprints don't necessarily specify blue buildings, selfish genes don't necessarily specify selfish organisms. As we shall see, sometimes the most selfish thing a gene can do is build a selfless brain. Genes are a play within a play, not the interior monologue of the players.” — 118 likes

“The supposedly immaterial soul, we now know, can be bisected with a knife, altered by chemicals, started or stopped by electricity, and extinguished by a sharp blow or by insufficient oxygen.” — 55 likes

More quotes…