What do you think?
Rate this book
Subliminal: How Your Unconscious Mind Rules Your Behavior
Leonard Mlodinow, the best-selling author of The Drunkard’s Walk and coauthor of The Grand Design (with Stephen Hawking), gives us a startling and eye-opening examination of how the unconscious mind shapes our experience of the world and how, for instance, we often misperceive our relationships with family, friends, and business associates, misunderstand the reasons for our investment decisions, and misremember important events.
Your preference in politicians, the amount you tip your waiter—all judgments and perceptions reflect the workings of our mind on two levels: the conscious, of which we are aware, and the unconscious, which is hidden from us. The latter has long been the subject of speculation, but over the past two decades researchers have developed remarkable new tools for probing the hidden, or subliminal, workings of the mind. The result of this explosion of research is a new science of the unconscious and a sea change in our understanding of how the subliminal mind affects the way we live.
Employing his trademark wit and lucid, accessible explanations of the most obscure scientific subjects, Leonard Mlodinow takes us on a tour of this research, unraveling the complexities of the subliminal self and increasing our understanding of how the human mind works and how we interact with friends, strangers, spouses, and coworkers. In the process he changes our view of ourselves and the world around us.
Your preference in politicians, the amount you tip your waiter—all judgments and perceptions reflect the workings of our mind on two levels: the conscious, of which we are aware, and the unconscious, which is hidden from us. The latter has long been the subject of speculation, but over the past two decades researchers have developed remarkable new tools for probing the hidden, or subliminal, workings of the mind. The result of this explosion of research is a new science of the unconscious and a sea change in our understanding of how the subliminal mind affects the way we live.
Employing his trademark wit and lucid, accessible explanations of the most obscure scientific subjects, Leonard Mlodinow takes us on a tour of this research, unraveling the complexities of the subliminal self and increasing our understanding of how the human mind works and how we interact with friends, strangers, spouses, and coworkers. In the process he changes our view of ourselves and the world around us.
260 pages, Hardcover
First published April 24, 2012
About the author
Leonard Mlodinow
23 books1,142 followersLeonard Mlodinow is an American theoretical physicist and mathematician, screenwriter and author. In physics, he is known for his work on the large N expansion, a method of approximating the spectrum of atoms based on the consideration of an infinite-dimensional version of the problem, and for his work on the quantum theory of light inside dielectrics.
He has also written books for the general public, five of which have been New York Times best-sellers, including The Drunkard's Walk: How Randomness Rules Our Lives, which was chosen as a New York Times notable book, and short-listed for the Royal Society Science Book Prize; The Grand Design, co-authored with Stephen Hawking, which argues that invoking God is not necessary to explain the origins of the universe; War of the Worldviews, co-authored with Deepak Chopra; and Subliminal: How Your Unconscious Mind Rules Your Behavior, which won the 2013 PEN/E. O. Wilson Literary Science Writing Award. He also makes public lectures and media appearances on programs including Morning Joe and Through the Wormhole, and debated Deepak Chopra on ABC's Nightline.
He has also written books for the general public, five of which have been New York Times best-sellers, including The Drunkard's Walk: How Randomness Rules Our Lives, which was chosen as a New York Times notable book, and short-listed for the Royal Society Science Book Prize; The Grand Design, co-authored with Stephen Hawking, which argues that invoking God is not necessary to explain the origins of the universe; War of the Worldviews, co-authored with Deepak Chopra; and Subliminal: How Your Unconscious Mind Rules Your Behavior, which won the 2013 PEN/E. O. Wilson Literary Science Writing Award. He also makes public lectures and media appearances on programs including Morning Joe and Through the Wormhole, and debated Deepak Chopra on ABC's Nightline.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 995 reviews
March 17, 2019
Lots of interesting trivia illustrated with anecdotes (no doubt, to hold the reader from getting bored and/or distracted).
Q:
People seemed to “decide”... (c) yep, our subliminal is a tricky pal.
Q:
That’s why doctors instinctively “package” themselves in nice shirts and ties and it’s not advisable for attorneys to greet clients in Budweiser T-shirts. (c)
Q:
As the psychologist Jonathan Haidt put it, there are two ways to get at the truth: the way of the scientist and the way of the lawyer. Scientists gather evidence, look for regularities, form theories explaining their observations, and test them. Attorneys begin with a conclusion they want to convince others of and then seek evidence that supports it, while also attempting to discredit evidence that doesn’t.” (c)
Q:
Kant said, there is Das Ding an sich, a thing as it is, and there is Das Ding für uns, a thing as we know it. (c)
Q:
People have a basic desire to feel good about themselves, and we therefore have a tendency to be unconsciously biased in favor of traits similiar to our won, even such seemingly meaningless traits as our names. Scientists have even identified a discrete area of the brain, called the dorsal striatum, as the structure that mediates much of this bias.” (c)
Q:
Rosenthal went on to study precisely that – what expectation mean for our children. In one line of research he showed that teachers´ expectations greatly affect their students´ academic performance, even when the teachers try to treat them impartially. For example, he and a colleague asked schoolkids in eighteen classrooms to complete an IQ test. The teachers, but not students, were given results. The researchers told the teachers that the test would indicate which children had unusually high intellectual potential. What the teachers didn’t know was that the kids named as gifted did not really score higher than average on the IQ test – they actually had average scores. Shortly afterwards, the teachers rated those not labeled gifted as less curious and less interested than the gifted students – and the students´ subsequent grades reflected that.
But what is really shocking – and sobering – is the result of another IQ test, given eight months later. When you administer IQ test a second time, you expect that each child´s score will vary some. In general, about half of the children´s scores should go up and half down, as a result of changes in the individual’s intellectual development in relation to his peers or simply random variations. When Rosenthal administered the second test, he indeed found that about half the kids labeled “normal” showed a gain in IQ. But among those who´d been singled out as brilliant, he obtained a different result; about 80 % had an increase of at least 10 points. What´s more, about 20 % of the “gifted” group gained 30 or more IQ points, while only 5 % of the other children gained that many. Labeling children as gifted had proved to be a powerful self-fulfilling prophecy. (c) Amen. The way you name a ship...
Q:
People seemed to “decide”... (c) yep, our subliminal is a tricky pal.
Q:
That’s why doctors instinctively “package” themselves in nice shirts and ties and it’s not advisable for attorneys to greet clients in Budweiser T-shirts. (c)
Q:
As the psychologist Jonathan Haidt put it, there are two ways to get at the truth: the way of the scientist and the way of the lawyer. Scientists gather evidence, look for regularities, form theories explaining their observations, and test them. Attorneys begin with a conclusion they want to convince others of and then seek evidence that supports it, while also attempting to discredit evidence that doesn’t.” (c)
Q:
Kant said, there is Das Ding an sich, a thing as it is, and there is Das Ding für uns, a thing as we know it. (c)
Q:
People have a basic desire to feel good about themselves, and we therefore have a tendency to be unconsciously biased in favor of traits similiar to our won, even such seemingly meaningless traits as our names. Scientists have even identified a discrete area of the brain, called the dorsal striatum, as the structure that mediates much of this bias.” (c)
Q:
Rosenthal went on to study precisely that – what expectation mean for our children. In one line of research he showed that teachers´ expectations greatly affect their students´ academic performance, even when the teachers try to treat them impartially. For example, he and a colleague asked schoolkids in eighteen classrooms to complete an IQ test. The teachers, but not students, were given results. The researchers told the teachers that the test would indicate which children had unusually high intellectual potential. What the teachers didn’t know was that the kids named as gifted did not really score higher than average on the IQ test – they actually had average scores. Shortly afterwards, the teachers rated those not labeled gifted as less curious and less interested than the gifted students – and the students´ subsequent grades reflected that.
But what is really shocking – and sobering – is the result of another IQ test, given eight months later. When you administer IQ test a second time, you expect that each child´s score will vary some. In general, about half of the children´s scores should go up and half down, as a result of changes in the individual’s intellectual development in relation to his peers or simply random variations. When Rosenthal administered the second test, he indeed found that about half the kids labeled “normal” showed a gain in IQ. But among those who´d been singled out as brilliant, he obtained a different result; about 80 % had an increase of at least 10 points. What´s more, about 20 % of the “gifted” group gained 30 or more IQ points, while only 5 % of the other children gained that many. Labeling children as gifted had proved to be a powerful self-fulfilling prophecy. (c) Amen. The way you name a ship...
May 26, 2016
Whilst this book covered some ground I had already covered elsewhere, it nevertheless painted a good picture of our unconscious minds and motivations, which I found useful.
The unconscious is a slippery critter, sliding out of our grasp nearly every time we reach for it. Various researchers have designed myriad tests to try and monitor it - but it isn't easy.
It's a bit depressing to think about it really. We aren't totally irrational, but my goodness we're a bit woolly around the edges, that is for sure. Herewith a few issues raised by the book....
* We are biased in the way we access information, and usually we are unaware of our biases.We see what we want to see. We hear what we want to hear.
* We do top-down thinking. We make up our minds and then think of arguments to justify our decisions. (I've experienced this, a 'gut feeling' that something is right or wrong...and my subsequent research will back up my initial viewpoint...)
* We are drawn towards some things and repelled by others whilst often being totally unaware of the true factors motivating us.
* Consciously we can be liberal, fair and just, but unconsciously, at the same time, we can be prejudiced ...... racist, or prejudiced against fat or old people for instance. (I wish this idea had been better explained.)
* We operate largely on automatic pilot. It is likely that some of the things we do and say may seem to be clearly thought through, but sometimes we get hints that we are largely acting below the threshold of consciousness. (For instance I often apologise when someone bumps into me....this may well mean there is some sort of unconscious script telling me to apologise when things go wrong. Whose fault it is may be irrelevant to this script. )
* Most of us have an unrealistically rosy view of ourselves (and the author thinks this is a very positive thing.)
* We are strongly inclined to support the groups we belong to, however superficial our membership. We really have to guard against in-group, out-group prejudice.
* Our memories are fragile, rehashed, and often just plain wrong.
My one problem with the book is that I would have liked a description of the possible origins of the unconscious. Part of it must be physiology (the book mentions that we are buffeted around by the more primitive areas of our brains, and various hormones and so forth.) Plus there are idiosyncrasies in the way we see, hear, think and remember. Part of it must be upbringing (my urge to apologise at the drop of a pin must largely be due to years of parental insistence on please, thank you and I'm sorry.) And what about the rest? The unconscious is obviously a powerful factor in our lives. I'd like to know more about how it comes into being.
I end with a huge cacophony of notes. I really don't recommend that anyone else bothers to read them.
The unconscious is a slippery critter, sliding out of our grasp nearly every time we reach for it. Various researchers have designed myriad tests to try and monitor it - but it isn't easy.
It's a bit depressing to think about it really. We aren't totally irrational, but my goodness we're a bit woolly around the edges, that is for sure. Herewith a few issues raised by the book....
* We are biased in the way we access information, and usually we are unaware of our biases.We see what we want to see. We hear what we want to hear.
* We do top-down thinking. We make up our minds and then think of arguments to justify our decisions. (I've experienced this, a 'gut feeling' that something is right or wrong...and my subsequent research will back up my initial viewpoint...)
* We are drawn towards some things and repelled by others whilst often being totally unaware of the true factors motivating us.
* Consciously we can be liberal, fair and just, but unconsciously, at the same time, we can be prejudiced ...... racist, or prejudiced against fat or old people for instance. (I wish this idea had been better explained.)
* We operate largely on automatic pilot. It is likely that some of the things we do and say may seem to be clearly thought through, but sometimes we get hints that we are largely acting below the threshold of consciousness. (For instance I often apologise when someone bumps into me....this may well mean there is some sort of unconscious script telling me to apologise when things go wrong. Whose fault it is may be irrelevant to this script. )
* Most of us have an unrealistically rosy view of ourselves (and the author thinks this is a very positive thing.)
* We are strongly inclined to support the groups we belong to, however superficial our membership. We really have to guard against in-group, out-group prejudice.
* Our memories are fragile, rehashed, and often just plain wrong.
My one problem with the book is that I would have liked a description of the possible origins of the unconscious. Part of it must be physiology (the book mentions that we are buffeted around by the more primitive areas of our brains, and various hormones and so forth.) Plus there are idiosyncrasies in the way we see, hear, think and remember. Part of it must be upbringing (my urge to apologise at the drop of a pin must largely be due to years of parental insistence on please, thank you and I'm sorry.) And what about the rest? The unconscious is obviously a powerful factor in our lives. I'd like to know more about how it comes into being.
I end with a huge cacophony of notes. I really don't recommend that anyone else bothers to read them.
July 1, 2021
یک تحقیق تحت عنوان "پروژه بی گناهی" نشون می ده 75 درصد کسانی توی زندان افتادن به خاطر شهادت اشتباه بوده. یعنی شخص شاهد باور داره متهم رو در صحنه جرم دیده اما در حقیقت این باور ساخته و پرداخته ناخودآگاه اون شاهدها بوده که درست هم نبودن.
درباره کتاب
این کتاب در مورد مسائلی هستن که ما متوجهشون نیستم، و روی نا خودآگاه ما تاثیر می گذارن و در نتیجه اون ها رفتارمون رو در هر موقعیتی شکل می دن مثل همین مثالی که در بالا آوردم.
I. The new unconscious
فصل اول تشریح این موضوع هست که حدود 95 درصد از فعالیت های مغزی ما از دیدن، ادراک، حافظه، توجه، یادگیری، تصمیم گیری و قضاوت توسط ناخودآگاه ما انجام می شه و جهت حفظ بقا پیش نیاز همه این موراد سرعت عمل بوده و هست.
یکی از گرایش های عمیق بشری داشتن احساس خوب در مورد خودش هست و به خاطر همین به طور نا خودآگاه به کسانی که ویژگی هایی شبیه ما دارن گرایش و حس خوب پیدا می کنیم.
عجیب ولی واقعی
بریم سراغ چنتا مثال جالب که لازم به ذکره همه منتج شده از تحقیقات معتبر هستند.
یکی از مطالعه های خیلی معروف،در خصوص درصد زوج هایی که حروف اول اسمشون شبیه هم هست گواه این موضوع هست که تشابه اسمی می تونه یکی از فاکتور های بروز عشق در خصوص شخص مقابل باشه.
انتظارات ما بر ذائقه ما تاثیر مستقیم داره. مثلا توی یک مطالعه یک نوع شراب رو توی شیشه ها با برچسب های قیمتی متفاوت به شرکت کنندگان سرو می کنن. فرض کنید قیمت های 10، 30 و 200 دلاری. تقریبا همه شرکت کنندگان می گن طعم شراب سرو شده از بطری 200 دلاری بهتر بود. جالب تر اینکه حتی متخصصان چشیدن شراب هم مثل آدمای معمولی فریب این برچسب قیمت ها رو خوردن و کیفیت شراب رو بهتر از بقیه تشخیص دادن.
Fluency Effect
نوع ارائه یک مطلب در اینکه چه برداتشی از محتوا کنیم تاثیر مستقیم داره. مثلا اگر دو رژیم غذایی یکسان رو یکی با دست خط روان و یکی با دست خط ناخوانا به افراد بدن، کسانی که نسخه خوش خط رو دارن این حس رو دارن که با رژیمی راحتی مواجه هستن و کسایی که نسخه بدخط رو دارن تشخیصشون اینه که با رژیمم سختی مواجه هستن.
یا در بحث خرید غذا، تحقیقات نشون می ده اگر به جای عکس یا نوشته، خود غذا رو نشون مشتری ها بدن، معمولا 40 تا 60 درصد پول بیشتری حاضرن برای خرید بپردازن.
نکته جالب همه مثال های بالا اینه که تصمیمات ما، شدیدا متاثر از عوامل بسیار و بی ربطی هستن. عواملی که با تمایلات ناخودآگاه ما خوش و بش می کنن و منجر به تصمیمی می شن که فکر می کنیم آگاهانه گرفتیم.
طبق مطالعات انجام شده، کلیه حواس انسان، در هر ثانیه حدود یازده ملیون بیت اطلاعات به مغز ارسال می کنن که از این مقدار مغز توان پردازش حدودا50 تا 60 بیت در ثانیه رو داره. اگر قرار بود این حجم اطلاعات رو آگاهانه پردازش کنیم، مغز ما منفجر می شد. با این حال بخش عظیمی از این اطلاعات خارج از آگاهی ما توسط نا خودآگاه ما پردازش می شه.
بیشترین فشار ممکنی که ما با غایت تمرکزی که می تونیم روی موضوعی کنیم، در نهایت ممکنه مصرف کل انرژی مغز رو یک درصد ببره بالا. فارغ از اینکه آگاهیی ما درگیر فعالیت باشه یا نه، ضمین ناخودآگاه ما همیشه سخت در حال انجام کارهای سنگین هست.
درباره کتاب
این کتاب در مورد مسائلی هستن که ما متوجهشون نیستم، و روی نا خودآگاه ما تاثیر می گذارن و در نتیجه اون ها رفتارمون رو در هر موقعیتی شکل می دن مثل همین مثالی که در بالا آوردم.
I. The new unconscious
فصل اول تشریح این موضوع هست که حدود 95 درصد از فعالیت های مغزی ما از دیدن، ادراک، حافظه، توجه، یادگیری، تصمیم گیری و قضاوت توسط ناخودآگاه ما انجام می شه و جهت حفظ بقا پیش نیاز همه این موراد سرعت عمل بوده و هست.
یکی از گرایش های عمیق بشری داشتن احساس خوب در مورد خودش هست و به خاطر همین به طور نا خودآگاه به کسانی که ویژگی هایی شبیه ما دارن گرایش و حس خوب پیدا می کنیم.
عجیب ولی واقعی
بریم سراغ چنتا مثال جالب که لازم به ذکره همه منتج شده از تحقیقات معتبر هستند.
یکی از مطالعه های خیلی معروف،در خصوص درصد زوج هایی که حروف اول اسمشون شبیه هم هست گواه این موضوع هست که تشابه اسمی می تونه یکی از فاکتور های بروز عشق در خصوص شخص مقابل باشه.
انتظارات ما بر ذائقه ما تاثیر مستقیم داره. مثلا توی یک مطالعه یک نوع شراب رو توی شیشه ها با برچسب های قیمتی متفاوت به شرکت کنندگان سرو می کنن. فرض کنید قیمت های 10، 30 و 200 دلاری. تقریبا همه شرکت کنندگان می گن طعم شراب سرو شده از بطری 200 دلاری بهتر بود. جالب تر اینکه حتی متخصصان چشیدن شراب هم مثل آدمای معمولی فریب این برچسب قیمت ها رو خوردن و کیفیت شراب رو بهتر از بقیه تشخیص دادن.
Fluency Effect
نوع ارائه یک مطلب در اینکه چه برداتشی از محتوا کنیم تاثیر مستقیم داره. مثلا اگر دو رژیم غذایی یکسان رو یکی با دست خط روان و یکی با دست خط ناخوانا به افراد بدن، کسانی که نسخه خوش خط رو دارن این حس رو دارن که با رژیمی راحتی مواجه هستن و کسایی که نسخه بدخط رو دارن تشخیصشون اینه که با رژیمم سختی مواجه هستن.
یا در بحث خرید غذا، تحقیقات نشون می ده اگر به جای عکس یا نوشته، خود غذا رو نشون مشتری ها بدن، معمولا 40 تا 60 درصد پول بیشتری حاضرن برای خرید بپردازن.
نکته جالب همه مثال های بالا اینه که تصمیمات ما، شدیدا متاثر از عوامل بسیار و بی ربطی هستن. عواملی که با تمایلات ناخودآگاه ما خوش و بش می کنن و منجر به تصمیمی می شن که فکر می کنیم آگاهانه گرفتیم.
We believe that when we choose a laptop or a laundry detergent, plan a vacation, take a job, make a friend, judge a stranger and even fall in love, we understand the principal factors that influenced us. Very often nothing could be further from the truth. As a result, many of our most basic assumptions about ourselves and society are false.II. Sense plus Mind Equals Reality
طبق مطالعات انجام شده، کلیه حواس انسان، در هر ثانیه حدود یازده ملیون بیت اطلاعات به مغز ارسال می کنن که از این مقدار مغز توان پردازش حدودا50 تا 60 بیت در ثانیه رو داره. اگر قرار بود این حجم اطلاعات رو آگاهانه پردازش کنیم، مغز ما منفجر می شد. با این حال بخش عظیمی از این اطلاعات خارج از آگاهی ما توسط نا خودآگاه ما پردازش می شه.
بیشترین فشار ممکنی که ما با غایت تمرکزی که می تونیم روی موضوعی کنیم، در نهایت ممکنه مصرف کل انرژی مغز رو یک درصد ببره بالا. فارغ از اینکه آگاهیی ما درگیر فعالیت باشه یا نه، ضمین ناخودآگاه ما همیشه سخت در حال انجام کارهای سنگین هست.
عجیب ولی واقعی
این یکی از هیجان انگیزترین مسائلی هست که تا به حال در مورد مغز خوندم. همونطور که احتمالا می دنید اعمالی که سمت راست بدن رو درگیر می کنند توسط نیم کره چپ و برعکس مدیریت می شن و هر وظیفه ای یک بخش از مغز برعهده داشته باشه، نقطه تقارنش در نیم کره دیگه هم اغلب همون وظیفه رو بر عهده داره. البته به جز یک سری اعمال مشخص، مثلا زبان که صرفا توسط نیم کره چپ پردازش می شه.
توی یک آزمایش یک تصویر متحرک رو رو برای چشم سمت چپ پش می کنند و یک تصویر ثابت برای چشم راست. در این حالت شما فقط تصویر متحرک رو به طور آگاهانه می بینید و اگر سوال بشه ازتون مستقیما نمی تونید بگید تصویر ثابتی که به چشم راستتون دیده چی بوده.
تصاویر ثابتی که به شرکت کنندگان نشون می دادن تصاویر تحریک کننده جنسی بودن که در نقاط مختلف صفحه (چپ، راست بالا یا پایین) قرار داشتن. بعد از نمایش چندتا اتفاق جالب رخ می ده
شرکت کنندگان هیچ کدوم اظهار نمی کنن که تصویر تحریک کننده ای دیدن. چرا که ذهن آگاهشون درگیر تصویر متحرک بوده
جالب اینکه وقتی ازشون می پرسن خوب اگه قرار باشه حدس بزنید تصویر تحریک کننده کجای صفحه نمایش داده شده(بالا پایین چپ یا راست) تقریبا همه درست جواب می دن.
سوم اینکه همه این شرکت کننده ها بعد از آزمایش یک حس خوشایندی (تحریک شده) داشتند ولی نمی دونستن چرا.
جالب تر از همه اینکه وقتی می پرسن چرا همچین حسی دارین شروع می کنن به خلق دلایل بی ربط. مثل می گن چون صبح صبحانه خوبی خوردم یا چونکه صندلی که روش نشستم خیلی راحت بوده.
نتیجه اینکه ناخودآگاه ما می بینه، می پسنده بدون اینکه ما متوجه شده باشیم و بعد از همه اینا ما شروع می کنیم به دفاع کردن و دلیل آوردن.
III. Remembering and forgetting
کلمه های زیر رو با دقت بخونید و سعی کنید به خاطر بسپاریدشون، یک دقیقه زمان کافی هست:
Candy, sour, sugar, bitter, good, taste, tooth, nice, honey, soda, chocolate, heart, cake, eat, and pie.
حفظ کردین؟ خوب حالا تنها در صورتی که مطمئن هستید پاسخ بدین. از بین کلمه های زیر کدوم ها رو بالا دیدین؟
taste, point, sweet.
اکثرا درست تشخیص می دن که کلمه پوینت، در بین کلمات نبوده، اما همون اکثرا به اشتباه فکر می کنن و مطمئن هستن که کلمه سوییت رو دیدن توی لیست. دلیلش اینه که حافظه انسان به صورت به خاطر سپردن جوهره یا چکیده مسائل کار می کنه نه جزئیات و وقایع.This is how memory works: Remember the gist, fill in the details, believe the result.
IV. The Importance of Being Social
July 12, 2012
Usually I love reading books in the genre. I love learning how people make decisions and how our subconscious mind directs our behavior. This book really tries to do a good job of explaining what our subconscious is and how it influences our behavior. Yet, for me it is a little heavy on the science and a little light on the application.
To be fair, the author really tries to intertwine interesting analogies and folksy anecdotes with the science of how life is really a subjective experience. But, it seems, he can't help himself from proving his point through reference to numerous studies and minute description of the brain and it's physicality.
Yes, it's interesting to know that out subconscious helps us function in life by filtering out a multitude of activities, sights and sounds. It's interesting that our memory isn't as accurate as we would like to believe. It's interesting that even our vision isn't as all encompassing as we think.
It's when he gets wades into the weeds of highly scientific explanation of evolution and neuroscience that he loses me.
Many of the later chapters also reveal what most of us know, if not factually, then intuitively. Women like deeper voiced men, tall men. Both sexes attribute positive characteristics to good looking people, in general.
So, toward the end, I put it down. The books of Dan Ariely are more to my liking. I also thought that The Power of Habit: Why We Do What We Do in Life and Business was a lot more engaging and memorable.
Read the book if you like a lot of scientific backup for the author's assertions of how your subconscious mind rules your behavior. If you're looking for ways to help change your own behavior or better understandand possibly influence the behavior of others, you may be disappointed.
To be fair, the author really tries to intertwine interesting analogies and folksy anecdotes with the science of how life is really a subjective experience. But, it seems, he can't help himself from proving his point through reference to numerous studies and minute description of the brain and it's physicality.
Yes, it's interesting to know that out subconscious helps us function in life by filtering out a multitude of activities, sights and sounds. It's interesting that our memory isn't as accurate as we would like to believe. It's interesting that even our vision isn't as all encompassing as we think.
It's when he gets wades into the weeds of highly scientific explanation of evolution and neuroscience that he loses me.
Many of the later chapters also reveal what most of us know, if not factually, then intuitively. Women like deeper voiced men, tall men. Both sexes attribute positive characteristics to good looking people, in general.
So, toward the end, I put it down. The books of Dan Ariely are more to my liking. I also thought that The Power of Habit: Why We Do What We Do in Life and Business was a lot more engaging and memorable.
Read the book if you like a lot of scientific backup for the author's assertions of how your subconscious mind rules your behavior. If you're looking for ways to help change your own behavior or better understandand possibly influence the behavior of others, you may be disappointed.
May 31, 2015
Great book that outlines just how weak human minds are. Or more specifically, how weak the conscious mind really is after all and how overpowering our unconscious is in our everyday lives. We filter the world with our five senses and further reduce that filtered information through evolutionary cognitive biases to construct a mental artificial environment in which we call "reality". Few people ever get to realize this, especially in its entirety. This book is definitely worth reading if you want to gain a deeper understanding of how you work and why you make certain decisions in life.
March 24, 2023
This is not really the Freud’s (or Jung's) notion of unconscious; rather, another level of processing information well beyond the conscious.
Drawing heavily on studies of memory (including the Münsterberg theory of memory) the author leads us to believe the uncomfortable truth that our own memory is not that reliable; instead, it may deceive us, as sometimes we fill in the gaps through the unconscious use of certain “techniques” (mediated by beliefs, expectations, desires, context and prior knowledge). The understanding of these “techniques” may be paramount when we deal with witnesses reporting on crimes.
To be more precise, this (new) notion of unconscious implies "brain processes which are automatic, beyond awareness and control".
The author approaches also the expression of emotions in the human face (referring the work of Paul Ekman), as well as the notion of social unconscious.
Drawing heavily on studies of memory (including the Münsterberg theory of memory) the author leads us to believe the uncomfortable truth that our own memory is not that reliable; instead, it may deceive us, as sometimes we fill in the gaps through the unconscious use of certain “techniques” (mediated by beliefs, expectations, desires, context and prior knowledge). The understanding of these “techniques” may be paramount when we deal with witnesses reporting on crimes.
To be more precise, this (new) notion of unconscious implies "brain processes which are automatic, beyond awareness and control".
The author approaches also the expression of emotions in the human face (referring the work of Paul Ekman), as well as the notion of social unconscious.
May 12, 2023
“We believe that when we choose a laptop or a laundry detergent, plan a vacation, pick a stock […] judge a stranger, fall in love, we understand the principal factors that influenced us. Very often nothing could be further from the truth. Many of our most basic assumptions about ourselves, and society, are false.”
You’re on the couch relaxing, and then get up and go for a run—your energy consumption increases about 100x. You’re on the couch watching an unengaging tv show, and then give all your effort for an intense math exam—your mental output increases about 1%. The unconscious uses the majority of the mental resources. “Our unconscious minds are active, purposeful, and independent.”
Much research show that individuals have high conviction but low ability when it comes to accurate introspection.
Interesting that studying the unconscious, once popularized by Freud and Jung, went out of fashion for decades, and now using improved methods of inquiry, there is a resurgence. I sometimes wonder if all my writing is unconscious, similar to how you do not know what you are going to say before you say it. Or that you can basically drive a car while scarcely giving it thought. To me, the notion “my fiction writing is unconscious” and “I don’t have free will” look very similar. To me, it seems it’s the unconscious that’s running the show.
I’m a rationalist, a science lover who has been wondering if there are ways to nurture the unconscious—feed it, harness it, hear it. Should I give more weight to hunches and dreams?
“Much of our social perception—like our vision, hearing, and memory—appears to proceed along pathways that are not associated with awareness, intention, or conscious effort.”
“In the new view, mental processes are thought to be unconscious because there are portions of the mind that are inaccessible to consciousness due to the architecture of the brain, rather than because they have been subject to motivational forces like repression.”
Rampant evidence for our visual, memory, and emotional illusions. Like our visual blind spot, our minds often fill in the blank.
This book reminds me of the seminal Thinking, Fast and Slow by Tversky and Kahneman.
It’s a fascinating topic, and a humbling one to consider we are not who or what we think we are. I wonder if all of everything is the playing out of billiard balls from when the big bang broke the rack.
***
Friends, on the first Tuesday of the month I send out a short newsletter with updates on my novel-in-progress, a glimpse of one writer's life in small-town coastal Tofino, and a link to the month's free eBooks of various authors. It’s my privilege to stay connected to those who appreciate my work. If interested, and to receive a free collection of my short stories, please sign up here: www.luckydollarmedia.com
You’re on the couch relaxing, and then get up and go for a run—your energy consumption increases about 100x. You’re on the couch watching an unengaging tv show, and then give all your effort for an intense math exam—your mental output increases about 1%. The unconscious uses the majority of the mental resources. “Our unconscious minds are active, purposeful, and independent.”
Much research show that individuals have high conviction but low ability when it comes to accurate introspection.
Interesting that studying the unconscious, once popularized by Freud and Jung, went out of fashion for decades, and now using improved methods of inquiry, there is a resurgence. I sometimes wonder if all my writing is unconscious, similar to how you do not know what you are going to say before you say it. Or that you can basically drive a car while scarcely giving it thought. To me, the notion “my fiction writing is unconscious” and “I don’t have free will” look very similar. To me, it seems it’s the unconscious that’s running the show.
I’m a rationalist, a science lover who has been wondering if there are ways to nurture the unconscious—feed it, harness it, hear it. Should I give more weight to hunches and dreams?
“Much of our social perception—like our vision, hearing, and memory—appears to proceed along pathways that are not associated with awareness, intention, or conscious effort.”
“In the new view, mental processes are thought to be unconscious because there are portions of the mind that are inaccessible to consciousness due to the architecture of the brain, rather than because they have been subject to motivational forces like repression.”
Rampant evidence for our visual, memory, and emotional illusions. Like our visual blind spot, our minds often fill in the blank.
This book reminds me of the seminal Thinking, Fast and Slow by Tversky and Kahneman.
It’s a fascinating topic, and a humbling one to consider we are not who or what we think we are. I wonder if all of everything is the playing out of billiard balls from when the big bang broke the rack.
***
Friends, on the first Tuesday of the month I send out a short newsletter with updates on my novel-in-progress, a glimpse of one writer's life in small-town coastal Tofino, and a link to the month's free eBooks of various authors. It’s my privilege to stay connected to those who appreciate my work. If interested, and to receive a free collection of my short stories, please sign up here: www.luckydollarmedia.com
July 7, 2016
Plenty in this book can be found in others, like "Strangers To Ourselves" or "Blink". But yeah, there was some new stuff as well. What he shared on "Blindsight" was fascinating, and there was other findings in the book that I've found interesting and have been fun to share with others.
In one section of the book Mlodinow covered cognitive biases--how we won't consider the evidence on the other-side and how experiments have proven that none of us are objective. The problem is we unconsciously filter what we don't agree with and uncritically confirm everything that fits our world-view. After sharing all of this Mlodinow just couldn't help but give some examples, like how stupid people are who just won't face that fact that "man is causing global warming" and those retards who won't acknowledge the fact that man evolved from lower animals. Which assumes (from Mlodinow's materialist perspective) that matter banged into existence from nothing, complex life formed from inanimate matter, information accidentally formed due to unintelligent forces and that consciousness evolved from unconscious matter.
I would have been perfectly fine with him bringing up these examples, if he could have been humble enough to acknowledge that his own biases, just maybe hinder him from considering the evidence on the other-side which I find very convincing. Of course, I doubt Mlodinow ever could truly consider the evidence that clashes with his naturalistic worldview. Anything that doesn't coincide with materialism is a priori considered not to be evidence. Naturalist have so effectually stacked the deck and thus can confidently assert no other worldview has a spec of evidence, only blind faith and only they themselves hold truth.
Or maybe I am wrong, maybe the author is truly objective in these two controversial issues and only us who disagree with him are blinded by our biases. No doubt I am plagued by them as much as anyone else.
In one section of the book Mlodinow covered cognitive biases--how we won't consider the evidence on the other-side and how experiments have proven that none of us are objective. The problem is we unconsciously filter what we don't agree with and uncritically confirm everything that fits our world-view. After sharing all of this Mlodinow just couldn't help but give some examples, like how stupid people are who just won't face that fact that "man is causing global warming" and those retards who won't acknowledge the fact that man evolved from lower animals. Which assumes (from Mlodinow's materialist perspective) that matter banged into existence from nothing, complex life formed from inanimate matter, information accidentally formed due to unintelligent forces and that consciousness evolved from unconscious matter.
I would have been perfectly fine with him bringing up these examples, if he could have been humble enough to acknowledge that his own biases, just maybe hinder him from considering the evidence on the other-side which I find very convincing. Of course, I doubt Mlodinow ever could truly consider the evidence that clashes with his naturalistic worldview. Anything that doesn't coincide with materialism is a priori considered not to be evidence. Naturalist have so effectually stacked the deck and thus can confidently assert no other worldview has a spec of evidence, only blind faith and only they themselves hold truth.
Or maybe I am wrong, maybe the author is truly objective in these two controversial issues and only us who disagree with him are blinded by our biases. No doubt I am plagued by them as much as anyone else.
May 1, 2012
Subliminal: How Your Unconscious Mind Rules Your Behavior by Leonard Mlodinow
"Subliminal" is the provocative and fascinating look at the unconscious part of our minds. One of my favorite authors and physicists, Leonard Mlodinow, takes the readers on a journey into the science of the unconscious. What a fun and enlightening book this was. Mlodinow is the master of making the difficult accessible and fun for the masses. How are mind works is one of the most interesting subjects and I was thrilled to see that the coauthor of both the Grand Design and the equally interesting book War of the Worldviews makes his latest venture into this intriguing science. This excellent 272-page book is composed of the following ten chapters: 1. The New Unconscious, 2. Senses Plus Mind Equals Reality, 3. Remembering and Forgetting, 4. The Importance of Being Social, 5. Reading People, 6. Judging People by Their Covers, 7. Sorting People and Things, 8. In-Groups and Out-Groups, 9. Feelings, and 10. Self.
Positives:
1. A fascinating topic (science of the unconscious) in the hands of a master.
2. Elegant, conversational tone that makes this book a treat to read.
3. Mlodinow consistently produces great books and this one lived up to my expectations.
4. As accessible a book as you will find. A difficult topic made easy and fun to read.
5. The book is loaded with great and I mean great examples to help the reader grasp the latest in the science. One of the books strengths.
6. Great use of science history.
7. The pioneers of the science of the unconscious.
8. Great use the latest scientific research in this fascinating topic to support well-stated positions.
9. You will end up with a better grasp at how our brains work.
10. A good use of illustrations.
11. Great quotes and factoids abound, "The truth is that our unconscious minds are active, purposeful, and independent."
12. Evolution...why our brains evolved to be what they are.
13. A truly exceptional study that mirrors the subjects' sexual preferences.
14. What modern neuroscience tells us about our brains and how we perceive the world.
15. How our memory system works. Who does it change over time? Find out.
16. Social interactions and the subliminal. Theory of mind. The three regions of the brain and the three basic types of nonverbal communication.
17. An interesting look at stereotyping.
18. Popular misconceptions analyzed.
19. What do we know about our feelings our emotions? Find out.
20. The ways to the truth...our worldviews.
21. How our brain creates unconscious biases.
22. Is unrealistic optimism good for you?
23. Great links.
Negatives:
1. Notes are great but a formal bibliography never hurts.
2. Nothing about supernatural beliefs and why they are so prevalent.
3. Having to get multiple copies to share.
In summary, I loved this book. It was an intellectual treat. The science of the unconscious is a fascinating topic and this book was loaded with a lot of great research. Mlodinow is a great author who is able to tackle complex topics and make it fun and interesting to read. If you want to learn about the science of the unconscious, make a conscious decision to get this one, I highly recommend it!!
Further suggestions: "The Grand Design" and "War of the Worldviews: Science Vs. Spirituality" coauthored by this same author were excellent, "Why People Believe Weird Things: Pseudoscience, Superstition, and Other Confusions of Our Time" and "The Believing Brain: From Ghosts and Gods to Politics and Conspiracies---How We Construct Beliefs and Reinforce Them as Truths" by Michael Shermer, "The Blank Slate: The Modern Denial of Human Nature" by Steven Pinker, Hardwired Behavior: What Neuroscience Reveals about Morality" by Laurence Tancredi, "Who's in Charge?: Free Will and the Science of the Brain" Michael S. Gazzaniga, "The Belief Instinct: The Psychology of Souls, Destiny, and the Meaning of Life" by Jesse Bering, "50 Popular Beliefs That People Think Are True" by Guy P. Harrison, "Mistakes Were Made (But Not by Me): Why We Justify Foolish Beliefs, Bad Decisions, and Hurtful Acts" by Carol Tavris. For the record, I have reviewed all the aforementioned books, enjoy.
"Subliminal" is the provocative and fascinating look at the unconscious part of our minds. One of my favorite authors and physicists, Leonard Mlodinow, takes the readers on a journey into the science of the unconscious. What a fun and enlightening book this was. Mlodinow is the master of making the difficult accessible and fun for the masses. How are mind works is one of the most interesting subjects and I was thrilled to see that the coauthor of both the Grand Design and the equally interesting book War of the Worldviews makes his latest venture into this intriguing science. This excellent 272-page book is composed of the following ten chapters: 1. The New Unconscious, 2. Senses Plus Mind Equals Reality, 3. Remembering and Forgetting, 4. The Importance of Being Social, 5. Reading People, 6. Judging People by Their Covers, 7. Sorting People and Things, 8. In-Groups and Out-Groups, 9. Feelings, and 10. Self.
Positives:
1. A fascinating topic (science of the unconscious) in the hands of a master.
2. Elegant, conversational tone that makes this book a treat to read.
3. Mlodinow consistently produces great books and this one lived up to my expectations.
4. As accessible a book as you will find. A difficult topic made easy and fun to read.
5. The book is loaded with great and I mean great examples to help the reader grasp the latest in the science. One of the books strengths.
6. Great use of science history.
7. The pioneers of the science of the unconscious.
8. Great use the latest scientific research in this fascinating topic to support well-stated positions.
9. You will end up with a better grasp at how our brains work.
10. A good use of illustrations.
11. Great quotes and factoids abound, "The truth is that our unconscious minds are active, purposeful, and independent."
12. Evolution...why our brains evolved to be what they are.
13. A truly exceptional study that mirrors the subjects' sexual preferences.
14. What modern neuroscience tells us about our brains and how we perceive the world.
15. How our memory system works. Who does it change over time? Find out.
16. Social interactions and the subliminal. Theory of mind. The three regions of the brain and the three basic types of nonverbal communication.
17. An interesting look at stereotyping.
18. Popular misconceptions analyzed.
19. What do we know about our feelings our emotions? Find out.
20. The ways to the truth...our worldviews.
21. How our brain creates unconscious biases.
22. Is unrealistic optimism good for you?
23. Great links.
Negatives:
1. Notes are great but a formal bibliography never hurts.
2. Nothing about supernatural beliefs and why they are so prevalent.
3. Having to get multiple copies to share.
In summary, I loved this book. It was an intellectual treat. The science of the unconscious is a fascinating topic and this book was loaded with a lot of great research. Mlodinow is a great author who is able to tackle complex topics and make it fun and interesting to read. If you want to learn about the science of the unconscious, make a conscious decision to get this one, I highly recommend it!!
Further suggestions: "The Grand Design" and "War of the Worldviews: Science Vs. Spirituality" coauthored by this same author were excellent, "Why People Believe Weird Things: Pseudoscience, Superstition, and Other Confusions of Our Time" and "The Believing Brain: From Ghosts and Gods to Politics and Conspiracies---How We Construct Beliefs and Reinforce Them as Truths" by Michael Shermer, "The Blank Slate: The Modern Denial of Human Nature" by Steven Pinker, Hardwired Behavior: What Neuroscience Reveals about Morality" by Laurence Tancredi, "Who's in Charge?: Free Will and the Science of the Brain" Michael S. Gazzaniga, "The Belief Instinct: The Psychology of Souls, Destiny, and the Meaning of Life" by Jesse Bering, "50 Popular Beliefs That People Think Are True" by Guy P. Harrison, "Mistakes Were Made (But Not by Me): Why We Justify Foolish Beliefs, Bad Decisions, and Hurtful Acts" by Carol Tavris. For the record, I have reviewed all the aforementioned books, enjoy.
April 30, 2017
While there were some good points in this book, the writing wasn't interesting enough to hold my attention for long.
It was too boring to get through and even though I got to ~80% I still couldn't force myself to finish it all.
It was too boring to get through and even though I got to ~80% I still couldn't force myself to finish it all.
August 16, 2020
Thoroughly enjoyable and enlightening book. Among other things, it's interesting how our minds fool us into remembering things that never happened, and rationalizing evidence for what we wanted to believe to begin with.
May 16, 2023
DNF. Unbearably boring. Could not find joy in continue reading and finally gave up...
June 6, 2018
Já não é a primeira vez que aqui trago o trabalho de Leonard Mlodinow, que se tem vindo a assumir como um dos mais influentes comunicadores de ciência da atualidade, contudo o modo como desta vez procedeu ao levantamento do tema acabou por revelar-se, em minha opinião, bastante superficial, desde logo porque não existe qualquer menção ao trabalho mais relevante da área, o de Daniel Kahneman e Amos Tversky. Ou seja, Mlodinow fala de experiências similares, mas ao não reconhecer o trabalho prévio, acaba por não recorrer a todo um manancial de conhecimento criado nas últimas décadas no domínio da Behavioural Economics, que desde logo fica evidente num título assente num conceito que foi popular há mais de 30 anos mas entretanto caiu em desuso: "Subliminal: How Your Unconscious Mind Rules Your Behavior" (2011).
Mlodinow trata o modo como o cérebro opera a realidade, nomeadamente a relação entre consciente e não-consciente, e como essa constante passagem entre os dois modos produz desvios ou erros nos processos de racionalização. Ou seja, Mlodinow analisa o impacto desses erros de leitura a partir das capacidades dos processos cognitivos de percepção, memória e atenção sobre as relações humanas, ou processos de socialização. Fala-nos assim do modo como lemos e julgamos os outros por meio de generalizações que o nosso cérebro opera para conseguir lidar com a complexidade da realidade. Deixo um excerto que resume os processos descritos:
“We like to think we judge people as individuals, and at times we consciously try very hard to evaluate others on the basis of their unique characteristics. We often succeed. But if we don’t know a person well, our minds can turn to his or her social category for the answers. Earlier we saw how the brain fills in gaps in visual data — for instance, compensating for the blind spot where the optic nerve attaches to the retina. We also saw how our hearing fills gaps, such as when a cough obliterated a syllable or two in the sentence “The state governors met with their respective legislatures convening in the capital city.” And we saw how our memory will add the details of a scene we remember only in broad strokes and provide a vivid and complete picture of a face even though our brains retained only its general features. In each of these cases our subliminal minds take incomplete data, use context or other cues to complete the picture, make educated guesses, and produce a result that is sometimes accurate, sometimes not, but always convincing. Our minds also fill in the blanks when we judge people, and a person’s category membership is part of the data we use to do that.”
Publicado no VI: https://virtual-illusion.blogspot.com...
Mlodinow trata o modo como o cérebro opera a realidade, nomeadamente a relação entre consciente e não-consciente, e como essa constante passagem entre os dois modos produz desvios ou erros nos processos de racionalização. Ou seja, Mlodinow analisa o impacto desses erros de leitura a partir das capacidades dos processos cognitivos de percepção, memória e atenção sobre as relações humanas, ou processos de socialização. Fala-nos assim do modo como lemos e julgamos os outros por meio de generalizações que o nosso cérebro opera para conseguir lidar com a complexidade da realidade. Deixo um excerto que resume os processos descritos:
“We like to think we judge people as individuals, and at times we consciously try very hard to evaluate others on the basis of their unique characteristics. We often succeed. But if we don’t know a person well, our minds can turn to his or her social category for the answers. Earlier we saw how the brain fills in gaps in visual data — for instance, compensating for the blind spot where the optic nerve attaches to the retina. We also saw how our hearing fills gaps, such as when a cough obliterated a syllable or two in the sentence “The state governors met with their respective legislatures convening in the capital city.” And we saw how our memory will add the details of a scene we remember only in broad strokes and provide a vivid and complete picture of a face even though our brains retained only its general features. In each of these cases our subliminal minds take incomplete data, use context or other cues to complete the picture, make educated guesses, and produce a result that is sometimes accurate, sometimes not, but always convincing. Our minds also fill in the blanks when we judge people, and a person’s category membership is part of the data we use to do that.”
Publicado no VI: https://virtual-illusion.blogspot.com...
February 5, 2020
Subliminal: How Your Unconscious Mind Rules Your Behavior is good summary on the topic of the unconscious mind. The the author clarifies at the beginning that unconscious mind in modern psychology and neuroscience is a totally different concept than Freud's subconsciousness. I have read some of the topics elsewhere, but still find the book useful.
The human mind constructs a picture of reality for the purpose of our survival, therefore accuracy is not a priority. Same is our memory. Our mind collects information that caught our attention, then constructs memory from the material available, and from time to time, the mind re-organizes and fills the missing details. One chapter is dedicated to our ability to categorize the world, which is a crucial talent that also gives rise to stereotypes. This talent, in combination with our tendency to form in-groups and to favor in-group members, becomes the psychological foundation of discrimination. There can be explicit and implicit biases. The book makes me thinking: is there a better way to fight discrimination?
The chapter of motivated reasoning reminds me of Learned Optimism: How to Change Your Mind and Your Life.
Oxytocin research has been advanced since the publication of the book in 2012. Here is an article on the subject of oxytocin and oxytocin nasal spray
I find it odd that the author did not mention Daniel Kahneman when he talked about behavior economy. My final problem of the book is the title: to claim your unconscious mind rules your behavior is inaccurate. The author wants to convey the idea that the unconscious mind is underestimated, but to call it "rule" is over-simplification.
The human mind constructs a picture of reality for the purpose of our survival, therefore accuracy is not a priority. Same is our memory. Our mind collects information that caught our attention, then constructs memory from the material available, and from time to time, the mind re-organizes and fills the missing details. One chapter is dedicated to our ability to categorize the world, which is a crucial talent that also gives rise to stereotypes. This talent, in combination with our tendency to form in-groups and to favor in-group members, becomes the psychological foundation of discrimination. There can be explicit and implicit biases. The book makes me thinking: is there a better way to fight discrimination?
The chapter of motivated reasoning reminds me of Learned Optimism: How to Change Your Mind and Your Life.
Oxytocin research has been advanced since the publication of the book in 2012. Here is an article on the subject of oxytocin and oxytocin nasal spray
I find it odd that the author did not mention Daniel Kahneman when he talked about behavior economy. My final problem of the book is the title: to claim your unconscious mind rules your behavior is inaccurate. The author wants to convey the idea that the unconscious mind is underestimated, but to call it "rule" is over-simplification.
November 16, 2017
Do que eu me lembro, mostra muitos experimentos psicológicos e como são as reações naturais do ser humano, muitas vezes contrasenso com o racional. Não sei se caso eu lesse hoje acharia tão interessante quanto na época, mas por via das dúvidas vou colocar a nota que ficou na minha mente, 5 estrelinhas.
August 2, 2017
Fantástico, outro adjetivo não serve para classificar esse livro. O nosso inconsciente, até há pouco tempo um desconhecido e apenas suspeitado, hoje conhecido e sua influência sobre nossa mente e nossas ações no mundo real estudada e, aos poucos, desvendada. É uma verdadeira atualização de conhecimento em psicologia experimental, conceitos antigos que eu tinha, foram superados por esse livrinho surpreendente. Porque é que tendemos a favorecer membros de nossos grupos mais próximos de influências? Porque somos preconceituosos? Porque nosso filtro semântico da realidade é tão forte e não enxergamos nossas próprias falhas? Porque as mentes mais evoluídas conseguem raciocinar em segundo, terceiro e até em quarto grau de abstração em relação à realidade dos objetos do mundo real? Surpreendente, o que é a nova área de neurociência social, evolução da psicologia experimental e social? Enfim, muito aprendizado e muita novidade nesse livrinho parrudo e compacto, que merece ser lido e relido. Recomendadissimo. E com ele completo minha meta de leituras para 2017, 30 livros! E não vou parar ai, talvez leia mais 30...
Want to read
December 19, 2018مدتها درگیر یا بهتر بگم در انتظار انتشار ترجمه فارسی این اثر بودم. نویسندهی کتاب، کسی هست که در نوشتن «طرح بزرگ» با هاوکینگ سابقهی همکاری داره و اثر در تشریح نقش ناخودآگاه در رفتار انسان هست _ اون هم با نگاهی شناختگرا و فیزیکی به کارکرد مغز و نه روانکاوی فرویدی.
عنوانِ اصلی جالبی برای ترجمه انتخاب نشده و هر چند که به پرفروش بودنِ کتاب بیشعوری برمیگرده ولی احتمالا باعث بشه مخاطب فرهیخته، پیشداوری مثبتی در مورد کتاب نداشته باشه
عنوانِ اصلی جالبی برای ترجمه انتخاب نشده و هر چند که به پرفروش بودنِ کتاب بیشعوری برمیگرده ولی احتمالا باعث بشه مخاطب فرهیخته، پیشداوری مثبتی در مورد کتاب نداشته باشه
January 4, 2024
Excellent book about the science of behaviour and decision making. We are unbelievably biased and most of our decisions are based on illogical, subjective factors of which we are not even aware.
There are so many examples of experiments where people made biased, irrational decisions and when asked about it they made up completely bogus reasons.
We favour people from our in-group without knowing and even when that in-group is just completely made up (for example randomly chosen for an experiment). If we are an accountant we will favour other accountants, if our name is Smith we will favour people named Smith and so on.
Very enlightening book. I will be reading more of Mlodinow's books for sure.
There are so many examples of experiments where people made biased, irrational decisions and when asked about it they made up completely bogus reasons.
We favour people from our in-group without knowing and even when that in-group is just completely made up (for example randomly chosen for an experiment). If we are an accountant we will favour other accountants, if our name is Smith we will favour people named Smith and so on.
Very enlightening book. I will be reading more of Mlodinow's books for sure.
December 26, 2020
أهمية تصنيف الآخرين!!
.
.
إذا قرأت لشخص ما قائمة من عشرة أو عشرين عنصرًا يمكن شراؤها من السوبر ماركت ، فلن يتذكر هذا الشخص سوى القليل منها. إذا كنت تكرر القائمة مرارًا وتكرارًا ، فسوف يتحسن استدعاء الشخص. ولكن ما يساعد حقًا هو أن يتم ذكر العناصر ضمن الفئات التي تقع فيها - على سبيل المثال ، الخضروات والفواكه والحبوب.
تشير الأبحاث إلى أن لدينا خلايا عصبية في قشرة الفص الجبهي تستجيب للفئات ، ويوضح تمرين القائمة السبب: التصنيف هو استراتيجية تستخدمها أدمغتنا لمعالجة المعلومات بكفاءة أكبر.
كل كائن وشخص نواجهه في العالم فريد من نوعه ، لكننا لن نعمل بشكل جيد إذا نظرنا إليهم بهذه الطريقة. ليس لدينا الوقت أو النطاق الترددي ��لذهني لمراقبة كل تفاصيل كل عنصر في بيئتنا والنظر فيها. بدلاً من ذلك ، نستخدم بعض السمات البارزة التي نلاحظها لتعيين الكائن في فئة ، ثم نبني تقييمنا للكائن على أساس الفئة بدلاً من الكائن نفسه. من خلال الحفاظ على مجموعة من الفئات ، فإننا نعجل في ردود أفعالنا. إذا لم نتطور للعمل بهذه الطريقة ، إذا عالجت أدمغتنا كل شيء واجهناه كفرد ، فقد يأكلنا دب بينما لا نزال نقرر ما إذا كان هذا المخلوق ذو الفرو بعينه خطيرًا مثل الذي أكل العم بوب. بدلاً من ذلك ، بمجرد أن نرى زوجين من الدببة تأكل أقاربنا ، فإن الأنواع بأكملها تحصل على سمعة سيئة.
ثم ، بفضل هذا النوع من التفكير ، عندما نلاحظ حيوانًا ضخمًا أشعثًا له قواطع كبيرة وحادة ، فإننا لا نضيع الوقت في جمع المزيد من البيانات ؛ نتصرف بناءً على حدسنا التلقائي بأنه خطير ونبتعد عنه. وبالمثل ، بمجرد أن نرى الكراسي ، نفترض أنه إذا كان هناك جسم بأربع أرجل وظهر ، فقد تم وضعه ليجلس عليه ؛ أو إذا كان السائق الذي أمامنا يمشي بشكل متقطع ، فنحن نحكم أنه من الأفضل أن نحافظ على مسافة بيننا وبينه.
يساعدنا التفكير في الفئات العامة مثل "الدببة" و "الكراسي" و "السائقين غير المنتظمين" على التنقل في بيئتنا بسرعة وكفاءة كبيرين ؛ نحن نفهم الأهمية الإجمالية للكائن أولاً ونقلق بشأن فرديته لاحقًا.
التصنيف من أهم الأعمال الذهنية التي نؤديها ، ونقوم بذلك طوال الوقت. حتى قدرتك على قراءة هذا الكلام تعتمد على قدرتك على التصنيف: تتطلب إتقان القراءة تجميع رموز متشابهة ، مثل b و d ، في فئات أحرف مختلفة ، مع إدراك أن الرموز متباينة مثل b و b و b كلها تمثل نفس الحرف .
تصنيف الأشياء ليس بالأمر السهل. وبغض النظر عن الخطوط المختلطة ، من السهل التقليل من تعقيد ما ينطوي عليه التصنيف لأننا عادةً ما نقوم بذلك بسرعة وبدون جهد واع. عندما نفكر في أنواع الطعام ، على سبيل المثال ، فإننا نعتبر تلقائيًا تفاحة وموزة في نفس الفئة - فاكهة - على الرغم من اختلافهما تمامًا ، لكننا نعتبر التفاحة وكرة البلياردو الحمراء في فئات مختلفة ، على الرغم من أنها تبدو متشابهة تمامًا.
للحصول على فكرة عن مدى تعقيد هذا التصنيف ، ضع في اعتبارك هذا : قبل بضع سنوات فقط تعلم علماء الكمبيوتر أخيرًا كيفية تصميم نظام رؤية (كمبيوتر) يمكنه أن ينجز مهمة التمييز بين القطط والكلاب!!
.
Leonard Mlodinow
Subliminal
Translated By #Maher_Razouk
.
.
إذا قرأت لشخص ما قائمة من عشرة أو عشرين عنصرًا يمكن شراؤها من السوبر ماركت ، فلن يتذكر هذا الشخص سوى القليل منها. إذا كنت تكرر القائمة مرارًا وتكرارًا ، فسوف يتحسن استدعاء الشخص. ولكن ما يساعد حقًا هو أن يتم ذكر العناصر ضمن الفئات التي تقع فيها - على سبيل المثال ، الخضروات والفواكه والحبوب.
تشير الأبحاث إلى أن لدينا خلايا عصبية في قشرة الفص الجبهي تستجيب للفئات ، ويوضح تمرين القائمة السبب: التصنيف هو استراتيجية تستخدمها أدمغتنا لمعالجة المعلومات بكفاءة أكبر.
كل كائن وشخص نواجهه في العالم فريد من نوعه ، لكننا لن نعمل بشكل جيد إذا نظرنا إليهم بهذه الطريقة. ليس لدينا الوقت أو النطاق الترددي ��لذهني لمراقبة كل تفاصيل كل عنصر في بيئتنا والنظر فيها. بدلاً من ذلك ، نستخدم بعض السمات البارزة التي نلاحظها لتعيين الكائن في فئة ، ثم نبني تقييمنا للكائن على أساس الفئة بدلاً من الكائن نفسه. من خلال الحفاظ على مجموعة من الفئات ، فإننا نعجل في ردود أفعالنا. إذا لم نتطور للعمل بهذه الطريقة ، إذا عالجت أدمغتنا كل شيء واجهناه كفرد ، فقد يأكلنا دب بينما لا نزال نقرر ما إذا كان هذا المخلوق ذو الفرو بعينه خطيرًا مثل الذي أكل العم بوب. بدلاً من ذلك ، بمجرد أن نرى زوجين من الدببة تأكل أقاربنا ، فإن الأنواع بأكملها تحصل على سمعة سيئة.
ثم ، بفضل هذا النوع من التفكير ، عندما نلاحظ حيوانًا ضخمًا أشعثًا له قواطع كبيرة وحادة ، فإننا لا نضيع الوقت في جمع المزيد من البيانات ؛ نتصرف بناءً على حدسنا التلقائي بأنه خطير ونبتعد عنه. وبالمثل ، بمجرد أن نرى الكراسي ، نفترض أنه إذا كان هناك جسم بأربع أرجل وظهر ، فقد تم وضعه ليجلس عليه ؛ أو إذا كان السائق الذي أمامنا يمشي بشكل متقطع ، فنحن نحكم أنه من الأفضل أن نحافظ على مسافة بيننا وبينه.
يساعدنا التفكير في الفئات العامة مثل "الدببة" و "الكراسي" و "السائقين غير المنتظمين" على التنقل في بيئتنا بسرعة وكفاءة كبيرين ؛ نحن نفهم الأهمية الإجمالية للكائن أولاً ونقلق بشأن فرديته لاحقًا.
التصنيف من أهم الأعمال الذهنية التي نؤديها ، ونقوم بذلك طوال الوقت. حتى قدرتك على قراءة هذا الكلام تعتمد على قدرتك على التصنيف: تتطلب إتقان القراءة تجميع رموز متشابهة ، مثل b و d ، في فئات أحرف مختلفة ، مع إدراك أن الرموز متباينة مثل b و b و b كلها تمثل نفس الحرف .
تصنيف الأشياء ليس بالأمر السهل. وبغض النظر عن الخطوط المختلطة ، من السهل التقليل من تعقيد ما ينطوي عليه التصنيف لأننا عادةً ما نقوم بذلك بسرعة وبدون جهد واع. عندما نفكر في أنواع الطعام ، على سبيل المثال ، فإننا نعتبر تلقائيًا تفاحة وموزة في نفس الفئة - فاكهة - على الرغم من اختلافهما تمامًا ، لكننا نعتبر التفاحة وكرة البلياردو الحمراء في فئات مختلفة ، على الرغم من أنها تبدو متشابهة تمامًا.
للحصول على فكرة عن مدى تعقيد هذا التصنيف ، ضع في اعتبارك هذا : قبل بضع سنوات فقط تعلم علماء الكمبيوتر أخيرًا كيفية تصميم نظام رؤية (كمبيوتر) يمكنه أن ينجز مهمة التمييز بين القطط والكلاب!!
.
Leonard Mlodinow
Subliminal
Translated By #Maher_Razouk
July 11, 2014
**edited 01/27/14
When I first saw this book, I knew I had to read it. Not only is it written by an author I've already had a positive experience with (The Drunkard's Walk: How Randomness Rules Our Lives), but the book had one of the funniest cover designs I've seen all year. In black text on a green background, it says, "Subliminal: How Your Unconscious Mind Rules Your Behavior." In the spaces in between, in green only slightly lighter than the background, it says, "Psst: Hey There, Yes: You, Sexy. Buy This Book Now. You Know You Want It." I laughed when I saw it and obeyed--well, not to the point of buying it, but I did pick it up.
I dove in eagerly, only to be brought to an abrupt and unpleasant halt in the first chapter. There's nothing that irritates me more than bad science, and the misapplication of statistics is on my permanent hit list. One of Mlodinow's examples of the importance of the subconscious is (according to him) that we are more attracted to people who share our last name. As "evidence", he provides a chart of raw counts of husband-wife surnames over three states which indicates that a Jones is more likely to marry a Jones even though Smiths are more common. My problem? Well, this is a perfect example of Bad Statistics: he grabs a convenient weak correlation over a ridiculously tiny sample, ignores all potential confounding variables (e.g. names aren't uniformly distributed: even though the overall population of Jones are smaller, a Jones may be more likely to meet another Jones than a Smith; last names indicate ethnicity and nationality and we know people have strong homophilous preferences that have nothing to do with melodious surnames, etc, etc.), and then extrapolates an outrageously broad and demonstrably inaccurate causal conclusion (this data indicates that we are subconsciously attracted to people who share our names). I put the book down in disgust.
And so the story ends, until one day, I ran across a version of the book on audio, read by none other than Mlodinow himself. I decided to give the book one more chance. I'm glad I did.
...
Due to my disapproval of GR's new and rather subjective review deletion policy, the rest of this review can be found on Booklikes.
When I first saw this book, I knew I had to read it. Not only is it written by an author I've already had a positive experience with (The Drunkard's Walk: How Randomness Rules Our Lives), but the book had one of the funniest cover designs I've seen all year. In black text on a green background, it says, "Subliminal: How Your Unconscious Mind Rules Your Behavior." In the spaces in between, in green only slightly lighter than the background, it says, "Psst: Hey There, Yes: You, Sexy. Buy This Book Now. You Know You Want It." I laughed when I saw it and obeyed--well, not to the point of buying it, but I did pick it up.
I dove in eagerly, only to be brought to an abrupt and unpleasant halt in the first chapter. There's nothing that irritates me more than bad science, and the misapplication of statistics is on my permanent hit list. One of Mlodinow's examples of the importance of the subconscious is (according to him) that we are more attracted to people who share our last name. As "evidence", he provides a chart of raw counts of husband-wife surnames over three states which indicates that a Jones is more likely to marry a Jones even though Smiths are more common. My problem? Well, this is a perfect example of Bad Statistics: he grabs a convenient weak correlation over a ridiculously tiny sample, ignores all potential confounding variables (e.g. names aren't uniformly distributed: even though the overall population of Jones are smaller, a Jones may be more likely to meet another Jones than a Smith; last names indicate ethnicity and nationality and we know people have strong homophilous preferences that have nothing to do with melodious surnames, etc, etc.), and then extrapolates an outrageously broad and demonstrably inaccurate causal conclusion (this data indicates that we are subconsciously attracted to people who share our names). I put the book down in disgust.
And so the story ends, until one day, I ran across a version of the book on audio, read by none other than Mlodinow himself. I decided to give the book one more chance. I'm glad I did.
...
Due to my disapproval of GR's new and rather subjective review deletion policy, the rest of this review can be found on Booklikes.
October 13, 2016
This was a timely book to read given the political maelstrom has so often in the past and continues to characterize American politics where we see individuals supporting, defending, and promoting their teams quarterback with a fervor that in most cases takes some pretty impressive mental gymnastics.
Think the decisions and choices you make are the result of careful scrutiny, reflection and logical deduction? ABSOLUTELY ...(insert mental drum roll please).
Like it or not most of us are on automatic pilot way more than we realize, and that automatic pilot is highly influenced in ways that are often hidden to our conscious minds. And even when we believe we are making well-thought out, well-researched choices, the reality is we are hard pressed to escape our own biases and for good reason. Our brains can't possibly evaluate every shred of data it encounters. It must categorize, simplify, and even ad-lib as needed to keep us focused on what's important as determined by the unconscious. Our genetics, our life experiences, our environment are all affecting our brains, much of the time, in ways in which we are unaware. Scary, maybe. Enlightening, absolutely. After all, we can't possibly begin to address our innate biases unless we can admit they exist and then identify them.
Bottom line: Consciousness is a mystery that may only be superceded by the mysteries of the unconscious and our will isn't as free as we would imagine it to be.
In my opinion, this is a book everyone should read. Fascinating on so many levels, it will make you question the bases for every belief (and memory) you've ever held and how you got there to begin with. Good stuff.
Think the decisions and choices you make are the result of careful scrutiny, reflection and logical deduction? ABSOLUTELY ...(insert mental drum roll please).
Like it or not most of us are on automatic pilot way more than we realize, and that automatic pilot is highly influenced in ways that are often hidden to our conscious minds. And even when we believe we are making well-thought out, well-researched choices, the reality is we are hard pressed to escape our own biases and for good reason. Our brains can't possibly evaluate every shred of data it encounters. It must categorize, simplify, and even ad-lib as needed to keep us focused on what's important as determined by the unconscious. Our genetics, our life experiences, our environment are all affecting our brains, much of the time, in ways in which we are unaware. Scary, maybe. Enlightening, absolutely. After all, we can't possibly begin to address our innate biases unless we can admit they exist and then identify them.
Bottom line: Consciousness is a mystery that may only be superceded by the mysteries of the unconscious and our will isn't as free as we would imagine it to be.
In my opinion, this is a book everyone should read. Fascinating on so many levels, it will make you question the bases for every belief (and memory) you've ever held and how you got there to begin with. Good stuff.
February 9, 2019
The ending felt rushed and somehow incomplete but it didn't matter so much due to the abundance of facts, explanations and (my favorite part) lots and lots of descriptions of studies conducted by research scientists along the decades, in different fields of interest.
It's basically a 200-page collection of studies and experiments that prove various theories from neuroscience and social psychology.
If you're into the way the brain works and like to hear weird and sometimes highly unexpected (and disturbing) facts about yourself and about how everything you actually perceive is most probably an illusion orchestrated by your unconscious, read on.
I really enjoyed it.
It's basically a 200-page collection of studies and experiments that prove various theories from neuroscience and social psychology.
If you're into the way the brain works and like to hear weird and sometimes highly unexpected (and disturbing) facts about yourself and about how everything you actually perceive is most probably an illusion orchestrated by your unconscious, read on.
I really enjoyed it.
March 25, 2024
Εξαιρετικό!
December 21, 2014
Marvelous read.
The dynamic of this book, unlike that of ‘Thinking Fast and Slow', is so righteously tuned, keeping the reader thoroughly hooked. I was eating my way through the pages. The author is outright witty and happens to be a theoretical physicist who’s probing a psychological subject – neuroscience to be precise. Basically, a great mash up.
The theory of mind, how it correlates with human behavior and social norms. The impact of our unconscious on everyday life. The biases and judgments we conjure. The stances we take, opinions we formulate and arguments we postulate. Objectivity, in the broad sense of the word, is put to question.
How truly independent are we regarding to how truly independent we think we are?
Experiment after experiment, social study after another the reader learns how fallible the brain process really is. Like the blind spot where the optic nerve links to the retina, most of our experiences suffer from incomplete sets of data, yet we manage to draw our conclusions by combining, filling and interpolating the available vertices, or those we judge apt to. Right down to scientists, we keep clinging to false theories we have invested in (e.g. pro-static universe theorists or anti-global climate change advocates.)
And when the book seems to converge toward human impotence and overall inability to impartially judge events, Mlodinow states that,
So after all the critical analysis of the brain workings, after all the thought experiments are we to conclude that, whether or not we have power over our limbic system, we should leave it alone, that intuitive data be left alone, that a scrupulous conscious inspection is dismissible? Since an overly positive self-evaluation is normal, exclusively common might I add, are we to conclude that introspection aiming to subsume objectivity under the realm of the self should rather be discouraged, an end we should not strive for?
Then I guess we have to choose our beliefs wisely.
The dynamic of this book, unlike that of ‘Thinking Fast and Slow', is so righteously tuned, keeping the reader thoroughly hooked. I was eating my way through the pages. The author is outright witty and happens to be a theoretical physicist who’s probing a psychological subject – neuroscience to be precise. Basically, a great mash up.
The theory of mind, how it correlates with human behavior and social norms. The impact of our unconscious on everyday life. The biases and judgments we conjure. The stances we take, opinions we formulate and arguments we postulate. Objectivity, in the broad sense of the word, is put to question.
How truly independent are we regarding to how truly independent we think we are?
Experiment after experiment, social study after another the reader learns how fallible the brain process really is. Like the blind spot where the optic nerve links to the retina, most of our experiences suffer from incomplete sets of data, yet we manage to draw our conclusions by combining, filling and interpolating the available vertices, or those we judge apt to. Right down to scientists, we keep clinging to false theories we have invested in (e.g. pro-static universe theorists or anti-global climate change advocates.)
And when the book seems to converge toward human impotence and overall inability to impartially judge events, Mlodinow states that,
“studies show that people with the most accurate self-perceptions tend to be moderately depressed, suffer from low self-esteem, or both.”He adds,
“An overly positive self-evaluation, on the other hand, is normal and healthy.”
So after all the critical analysis of the brain workings, after all the thought experiments are we to conclude that, whether or not we have power over our limbic system, we should leave it alone, that intuitive data be left alone, that a scrupulous conscious inspection is dismissible? Since an overly positive self-evaluation is normal, exclusively common might I add, are we to conclude that introspection aiming to subsume objectivity under the realm of the self should rather be discouraged, an end we should not strive for?
“Unlike phenomena in physics, in life, events can depend largely upon which theory we choose to believe. It is a gift of the human mind to be extraordinarily open to accepting the theory of ourselves that pushes us in the direction of survival, and even happiness.”
Then I guess we have to choose our beliefs wisely.
August 15, 2014
This book was so interesting I went through it in just 2 days! It goes deep into self-fulfilling prophecies, group think, effects of optimism and how our brain chemistry is physically changing depending on our perception. This is a book you don't wanna miss out on, a lot of the studies mentioned in the book are also fairly new discoveries as the real-time brain-scanning technology wasn't even available for such studies in the past. HIGHLY RECOMMENDED!
October 4, 2012
“When you come up with an explanation for your feelings and behavior, your brain performs an action that would probably surprise you: it searches your mental database of cultural norms and picks something plausible.”
There is a touch of existential terror when thinking about the brain as physical. When you're not actively engaged in thinking about what is in your head, it feels natural to treat it like a magical repository of all your experiences and leave it at that. Subliminal took me longer than normal to finish, but it contains the same Mlodinow charm that filled The Drunkard's Walk and Euclid's Window; stories, delivered easily and frequently as examples or illustrations, retain all of their inherent complexity. Mlodinow conjures up the image of Aesop recounting a fable to a truculent child, explaining away complexity with patience, supported upon an ethereal balance of dry scientific treatises, personal stories, and detailed examples. Dense topics are made accessible without any hint of condescension, trusting the reader to follow along all while elegantly constructing a bridge between the gap of his considerable knowledge and skills and the infinitely complex hypothetical baseline understanding of the brain, or basic science, that a reader may bring. I will continue to read whatever he writes whenever I can. That said, I liked Subliminal less than the others, yet I wonder if I would have liked it less still had it not had the author's name attached. “The “causal arrow” in human thought processes consistently tends to point from belief to evidence, not vice versa.” [citation omitted] I wonder if came in expecting to be less impressed, less open to hearing about neuroscience from a physicist.
“Motivated reasoning involves a network of brain regions that are not associated with “cold” reasoning, including the orbitofrontal cortex and the anterior cingulate cortex—parts of the limbic system—and the posterior cingulate cortex and precuneus, which are also activated when one makes emotionally laden moral judgments.” [citation omitted]That the general areas of the brain that act and interact can be quantifiably tracked, and that conclusions can be drawn that from where and what systems are engaged in different types of decisions and thoughts is an unbelievably amazing window into thoughts. It is terrifying to think of reductivist conclusions, but Subliminal avoids any sort of,“This neuron does this, and only this, so buy some fish oil and you'll be smarter,” reductio ad absurdum arguments. The ascension of fMRI in the last 20 years has changed the way psychology and psychiatry will move forward, and there is more upheaval now and more data that haven't yet entered the basic public lexicon than any time since Freud. That there is now supported science backing Emerson's view of personage thrills me. Subliminal: “We behave differently when we are in a good mood than when we are in a bad one. We behave differently having lunch with our boss than when having lunch with our subordinates...our character is not indelibly stamped on us but is dynamic and changing,” is well paired with Self-Reliance: “A foolish consistency is the hobgoblins of little minds. Speak what you think now in hard words, and tomorrow speak what tomorrow thinks in hard words again, though it contradict every thing you said today.” Talk of in-groups and out-groups might well have been torn straight out of the pages of C.S. Lewis' The Inner Ring, and Subliminal tends to back up with experimental data.
“In one study, researchers asked subjects to rate the likability of doctors, lawyers, waiters, and hairdressers, on a scale from 1 to 100. [citation omitted] The twist was, every subject in this experiment was him- or herself either a doctor, a lawyer, a waiter, or a hairdresser. The results were very consistent: those in three of the four professions rated the members of the other professions as average, with a likeability around 50. But they rated those in their own professions significantly higher, around 70. There was only one exception: the lawyers, who rated both those in the other professions and other lawyers at around 50...of the four groups, lawyers form the only one whose members regularly oppose others in their own group.”
After enough time with Subliminal, you would be remiss not to question whether the zeitgeist around the flexible persona in the neuroscience community is in response to a pre-built acculturated desire to bolster the pillars of great philosophers, social and literary theorists. Did Emerson and Lewis preempt the science that supported them, or did society find a way to conform to Emerson and Lewis? Be wary,lest motivated thinking find its way into the very theory that it supports. "And if thou gaze long into an abyss, the abyss will also gaze into thee."
It is interesting to see something you thought was peculiar to yourself is a physiological trait of your species. “Linguists recognize two types of language structure: surface structure and deep structure. Surface structure refers to the specific way an idea is expressed, such as the words used and their order. Deep structure refers to the gist of the idea. [citation omitted] Most of us avoid the problems of clutter by retaining the gist but freely discarding the details. As a result, we can retain deep structure—the meaning of what was said—for long periods of time, we can accurately remember surface structure—the words in which it was said—for just eight to ten seconds [citation omitted].” If you've ever had an argument with your significant other about the exact phrasing of some prior verbal exchange, I do not recommend pointing out that the brain is not meant to remember surface structure longer than ten seconds. Remembering the gist but jettisoning the fiddly details has biological advantages, which Subliminal covers, and then goes the extra step to include a vivid story of a man who could not shed those minute, typically pointless, bits of information and the problems that his unique brain created for him.
This is a fascinating book, and from the blue-pen underlining of the “Reading People” chapter that my public library copy came burdened with, someone else believed that they could pick up some subtle tips to help with upcoming job interviews. If you pick this up, be prepared to be fascinated, informed, and a little bit sad. “Studies show that the people with the most accurate self-perceptions tend to be moderately depressed, suffer from low self-esteem, or both.” [citation omitted] Perhaps I did not appreciate having the "magical repository" image I had constructed of my brain altered. Have we now found an answer to why I trudged so slowly through Subliminal, and why it got short shrift on my list of favorite Mlodinow books? "Motivated reasoning enables our minds to defend us against unhappiness, and in the process it gives us the strength to overcome the many obstacles in life that might otherwise overwhelm us." No, it was the book, not me.
May 10, 2024
3.5/5. I liked this! I read it because we assign it at work to a group of people we hire and figured I’d give it a shot. It was unlike books I usually read, but still really enjoyed. Mlodinow makes reading a more science based book easy and entertaining. I learned a lot of neat things about how the brain works, and how thoughts and behaviors are impacted by our unconscious - it’s pretty wild stuff. Loved all the examples, anecdotes, and little interactive pieces he injects into the book as well. If you’re into this stuff, read this book!
May 10, 2013
Who's driving this thing?
Ever wonder what’s going on in your brain while you are busy strolling around saying funny stuff and thinking big, important things? Turns out, a whole lot. There’s an entire world of unconscious activity hidden just below the surface. If conscious thought is like a speedboat you pilot across the surface of the ocean(cue the Miami Vice theme), unconscious thought is the teeming, chaotic, beautiful mass of rainbow-colored tropical fish, graceful coral reefs, steely-eyed sharks and even a few grotesque bottom-dwellers hidden beneath. Once you dive in, you realize our subliminal thoughts are more powerful than the speedy, unreliable conscious thoughts we’re so proud of, skimming along the top. That’s because unconscious thought ultimately shapes our decisions, forges our world views and guides our relationships with others (and with ourselves), all without us even knowing or – equally important – without controlling or consenting.
Subliminal, by Leonard Mlodinow – a theoretical physicist – is a guided tour (blitzkrieg?) through the unconscious mind and shows that we are only loosely in control of our own consciousness, completely unaware of the things our brains take in when we aren't paying attention and at the mercy of filters we didn’t even know existed.
Study after study and weird example after weird example bring this to life: Folks who read a recipe in a difficult font rated it harder to prepare than the same recipe presented in an easy font (take note, designers), because our brains get us ready for tasks before we start them. Folks using exactly the same detergent in three differently-colored boxes consistently rated one in particular — the most colorful — the best of the three by far. Shoppers who heard French background music bought more French wine, and bought more German wine when German background music was playing even though none of them even remembered music playing. In another classic study, people consistently prefer Pepsi over Coke in a blind taste test, but they prefer Coke when the blindfold comes off.
Can you actually taste “brand?” People with brain damage in a specific location can’t. When the VMC area — thought to be the generator of warm, fuzzy feelings — was damaged, they didn’t experience the “Pepsi paradox.” (Please, Pepsi, don’t start damaging our brains).
There’s so much more: Statistical analysis found investors were more likely to invest in the initial public offerings of companies with easy-to-pronounce names. There are naturally occurring dead spots in our vision that our brain compensates for without us even knowing. Oxytocin, released during sex and even during hugs, affects social bonding, which in turn is shaped by brain size and complexity across species.
When you read this book, you’ll realize that it's crazy town up in your brain, and there ain't no mayor. We think we are driving the machine, but we are actually just along for the ride. There’s power in knowing that, though. This book is breathless, geeky fun, well written and packed with insights and puzzles and hard science and so many “ah-ha” moments that I eventually had to consign myself to the notion that I would have to read it twice.
An aside: This topic takes on even greater significance when you consider the recent Wired article that suggests consciousness continues for up to a few hours after death. The Meta isn’t sounding so crazy now, is it?
Ever wonder what’s going on in your brain while you are busy strolling around saying funny stuff and thinking big, important things? Turns out, a whole lot. There’s an entire world of unconscious activity hidden just below the surface. If conscious thought is like a speedboat you pilot across the surface of the ocean(cue the Miami Vice theme), unconscious thought is the teeming, chaotic, beautiful mass of rainbow-colored tropical fish, graceful coral reefs, steely-eyed sharks and even a few grotesque bottom-dwellers hidden beneath. Once you dive in, you realize our subliminal thoughts are more powerful than the speedy, unreliable conscious thoughts we’re so proud of, skimming along the top. That’s because unconscious thought ultimately shapes our decisions, forges our world views and guides our relationships with others (and with ourselves), all without us even knowing or – equally important – without controlling or consenting.
Subliminal, by Leonard Mlodinow – a theoretical physicist – is a guided tour (blitzkrieg?) through the unconscious mind and shows that we are only loosely in control of our own consciousness, completely unaware of the things our brains take in when we aren't paying attention and at the mercy of filters we didn’t even know existed.
Study after study and weird example after weird example bring this to life: Folks who read a recipe in a difficult font rated it harder to prepare than the same recipe presented in an easy font (take note, designers), because our brains get us ready for tasks before we start them. Folks using exactly the same detergent in three differently-colored boxes consistently rated one in particular — the most colorful — the best of the three by far. Shoppers who heard French background music bought more French wine, and bought more German wine when German background music was playing even though none of them even remembered music playing. In another classic study, people consistently prefer Pepsi over Coke in a blind taste test, but they prefer Coke when the blindfold comes off.
Can you actually taste “brand?” People with brain damage in a specific location can’t. When the VMC area — thought to be the generator of warm, fuzzy feelings — was damaged, they didn’t experience the “Pepsi paradox.” (Please, Pepsi, don’t start damaging our brains).
There’s so much more: Statistical analysis found investors were more likely to invest in the initial public offerings of companies with easy-to-pronounce names. There are naturally occurring dead spots in our vision that our brain compensates for without us even knowing. Oxytocin, released during sex and even during hugs, affects social bonding, which in turn is shaped by brain size and complexity across species.
When you read this book, you’ll realize that it's crazy town up in your brain, and there ain't no mayor. We think we are driving the machine, but we are actually just along for the ride. There’s power in knowing that, though. This book is breathless, geeky fun, well written and packed with insights and puzzles and hard science and so many “ah-ha” moments that I eventually had to consign myself to the notion that I would have to read it twice.
An aside: This topic takes on even greater significance when you consider the recent Wired article that suggests consciousness continues for up to a few hours after death. The Meta isn’t sounding so crazy now, is it?
September 14, 2012
Maybe you secretly liked or dislike the book more than you think? Mlodinow presents a solid literature review on recent research that all seems to point to the rationale mind holding far less power in the direction of human behavior than we would like to think. This discounting of the power of human thought follows a long series of scientific discoveries taking our self-image from lesser god to higher animal. Galileo demonstrated the sun did not revolve around us. Darwin negated our notions of divine creation. Freud and Skinner should our behavior was influenced by forces outside our control. And now functional MRI machines demonstrate that the conscious mind learns of rather than makes decisions.
The research on unconscious intentionality has yet to coalesce around one central figure as behaviorism found its Skinner but a number of authors have taken to writing about it. One of these is Mlodinow who does a solid job covering the field although many of the studies are covered more entertainingly in GLADWELL MALCOM, more authoritatively in Ariely Dan and more comprehensively inThinking, Fast and Slow from Dan Kaheman the "giant of science" in this field. If you don't want to pick up any of those authors, Mlodinow's review makes a good substitute. All of the head-scratching studies are here. Teachers told that randomly chosen children hold special genius find them far advanced compared to their equally talented control groups. This finding is intriguing enough but add to it a study concluding that students told their randomly chosen rat was bred to solve mazes more quickly actually find faster times from these compared to their genetically identical control group and you really have an intriguing result. Studies showing how much memory is a constructive process are fascinating particularly in a historical context such as a comparison of John Dean's testimony about what he said to President Richard Nixon during the Watergate coverup and the secret tapes later found of those conversations. Despite Dean having no reason to lie, the tapes and the testimony differ wildly. Add this to research demonstrating a 20-30% accuracy rate for eyewitnesses and you really begin to understand that your memoir could equally sit on the non-fiction and fiction library shelves.
Mlodinow's straight-forward solid writing style never veers into story-telling but it is generally tight if a little plodding. To his credit, Dr. Mlodinow doesn't sound like a physics professor for the most part and the book is fairly readable if a little dull at times.
In short, a good book for those who like psychological studies or just dislike feeling in control although other authors cover the same ground with better results.
June 6, 2012
leonard mlodinow's new book, subliminal: how your unconscious mind rules your behavior, is an engaging, stimulating work exploring the relatively young field of social neuroscience. mlodinow, a theoretical physicist (and one time screenwriter for both macgyver and star trek: the next generation), offers an introduction to, and overview of, the current science relating to our understanding of the unconscious and its ever-present role in shaping our daily lives. subliminal considers the two-tier system of the brain and the ramifications it has on the ways sensory input data is filtered and processed. mlodinow focuses a good portion of the book on theory of mind, memory and forgetting, language and non-verbal communication, categorization, and motivated reasoning.
incorporating into the narrative a large number of descriptive and illustrative studies and experiments, subliminal's main ideas are easy to conceptualize and their corresponding real-life corollaries amply explained. mlodinow is a lucid, descriptive writer; one adept at infusing his work with clever analogies and humorous one-liners. subliminal excels beyond many other popular science books in that it is consistently engrossing, never deigns to simplified or dumbed-down explanations, and encourages in its readers introspective ways of applying its insights.
incorporating into the narrative a large number of descriptive and illustrative studies and experiments, subliminal's main ideas are easy to conceptualize and their corresponding real-life corollaries amply explained. mlodinow is a lucid, descriptive writer; one adept at infusing his work with clever analogies and humorous one-liners. subliminal excels beyond many other popular science books in that it is consistently engrossing, never deigns to simplified or dumbed-down explanations, and encourages in its readers introspective ways of applying its insights.
evolution designed the human brain not to accurately understand itself but to help us survive. we observe ourselves and the world and make enough sense of things to get along. some of us, interested in knowing ourselves more deeply- perhaps to make better life decisions, perhaps to live a richer life, perhaps out of curiosity- seek to get past our intuitive ideas of us. we can. we can use our conscious minds to study, to identify, and to pierce our cognitive illusions. by broadening our perspective to take into account how our minds operate, we can achieve a more enlightened view of who we are. but even as we grow to better understand ourselves, we should maintain our appreciation of the fact that, if our mind's natural view of the world is skewed, it is skewed for a reason.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 995 reviews