Mind's Past

This lightly told, but hardly frivolous, study of the mind/brain refutes many long-held notions of what comprises the conscious mind. Gazzinga's approach is an attempt to inform us all of the real status of "self." He contends the "self" - hence, "free will" is a conceit. We pretend to have consciousness through our desire to establish identity, but the brain has its own, hidden, mechanisms of which we are only now becoming aware. He stresses the evolutionary roots of our minds, roots which may not compel behaviour, but certainly drive it with forces we fail to perceive readily. It's an amazingly complete work in spite of its brevity, rewarding to anyone opening its pages.Gazzaniga is a clinical researcher, not a field worker. This doesn't impede his stressing an evolutionary development for how our minds work. Gazzaniga posits an "interpreter" as residing within our left brains. The distinctive roles of the left and right halves of the brain have been the subject of intensive research during the past years, but his assessment has some novelty. It is rather more than the classical "Cartesian Theatre" which has held sway in the minds of many psychologists and philosophers over the years. Gazzaniga's "interpreter" outperforms the role of "observer" postulated by Descartes. It has moved from Descartes' pineal gland to the left cortex. In Gazzaniga's view, the "interpreter" has a more active role, even powered to stimulate activity in sensory areas, previously thought to be wholly reactive. This device is rooted in our animal ancestors, living in a dangerous environment, needing to predict events for survival and reproduction. We have progressed beyond those roots, but the function has had long career, according to Gazzaniga. He stresses that we must learn more about its abilities and operations. His use of sources is awkward. While utilizing the work of numerous researchers in his account, his attributions are hazy. The appended notes are collected by chapters, but relating the list to the text is difficult. Countless workers noted in the text fail to appear in the notes. We have only Gazzaniga's assurances that his references are valid. While his approach makes for easy readability, one's own "interpreter" sits uncomfortable at these omissions. Many well-known figures in consciousness studies are omitted. He builds a superb case, but it seems to rest on a shaky foundation. Still, his assertions need response and it will be fascinating to see who answers his contentions.

The first half of this book is a very good story about how mammalian brains function. Mercifully, it's not a drawn out document on neuroanatomy and neurophysiology, but rather a description how the emergent forms of neuroanatomy and neurophysiology function; about how the brain works. In this respect it's a fascinating and informative essay written for the lay reader by a very eminent neurologist. Gazzaniga's ease of translating the dessicated lexicon of neurology into a cozy fireside tale is certainly a testement to his literary skill over and above his medical acumen.The second half of the book trails off into monotonous case studies and lacks the zing of the opening chapters. I rated this book a five however because it carries such a seminal point that in itself is of astounding significance. The human brain is no where near as plastic as it's given credit for being in the popular literature. We all know what a brain looks like. Just thinking of the word brings to mind a fixed image we've all seen in myriads of represnetations. They all sort of look the same, and guess what, they all sort of function the same way too: function follows form, or, as Sartre said, the essence is revealed in the appearance, not concealed by it. This is not to say that the brain functions how it looks, but an analogy illustrating that a brain's function is based on its form, or, its anatomy and physiology. You'd think this would be obvious but apparently for some reason it isn't. It's is an important point and Gazzaniga breaks it down very plainly and simply. The idea that neural function follows form is not immediately apparent to the lay person because it is a very politically unpopular view. Not a neurologically unpopular view but a politically unpopular view. Think about it. Contemporary social policy strongly prefers a view that the brain is molded by environment so it can sell policies to solve problems. The brain, long evolved over eons has its own agenda however. Any pediatric neurologist can tell you, tragically, how the brain tolerates very little variation in local structure and chemistry; kids born with slight variations in brain anatomy and chemistry are subject to acute difficulties. We're all really very much more similar in terms of how our brains function than we generally allow for. The brain is, to be blunt, a product of genetics, "those pesky little robots of nature" as Gazzaniga calls them. Obviously, as E. O. Wilson learned, the world is not yet ready for sociobiology. Gazzaniga ignores such political correctness and proceeds to discuss how the brain actually functions, not how some may wish it to. Gazzaniga would have us consider behavior based on neural function as an endocrinologist would consider diabetes relative to pancreatic function; by material cause and effect. Can you imagine the chaos such a view would cause in a cultural system based on the idea of free will from the Protestant aesthetic of John Winthrop? More, it seems, of people'

This book is, of course, an attempt to provide for the layman a comprehensive, comprehensible summary of the current state of cognitive neuroscience, not an easy task. Gazzaniga has the credentials to do this, being Director of Cognitive Neuroscience at Dartmouth and the author of several authoritative texts on the subject. The suprise is that he has the capacity to make this palatable for the lay reader. I found his discription of the methodology and the current findings absolutely astounding. To read the clever experiments that pry open the functions of the brain is awe inspiring. The reader can only marvel at the complexity of human mental function, but with an inkling that we have the power to unravel its mysteries.This book clearly demonstrates the progress that we are making in this area. Moreover the study of abnormal brain function is eye-opening in its implications for our understanding of normal brain activity.Well worth reading!

This book takes a look at long held assumptions about human consciousness, and examines them in the light of modern empirical neuroscience. It examines the processes of perception and the work of the left brain's "interpreter." It's an uncommon look at "common sense."The first chapter of the book examines the "Fictional Self," and continues to weave this thread of thought throughout the book. What fascinated me most about this line of thought was that it paralleled ancient Eastern thought about the illusion of individual reality. However, Dr. Gazzaniga's book does not draw on these ancient traditions, and it is up to the reader to figure them out.Dr. Gazzaniga writes, "... the primate brain prepares cells for decisive action long before we are even thinking about making a decision! These automatic processes sometimes get tricked and create illusions - blatant demonstrations of these automatic devices that operate so efficiently that no one can do anything to stop them. They run their course and we see them in action; as a consequence we have to conclude that they are a big part of us." p. 20In The Bhagavad-Gita it says, " As the ignorant act with attachment to actions, Arjuna, so wise men should act with detachment to preserve the world." (3rd Teaching, 25, translated by Barbara Stoler Miller) Just like "The Mind's Past," The Bhagavad-Gita points out the illusion of willful action. Dr. Gazzaniga's empirical observations have a poetic parallel in The Bhagavad-Gita.The book also examines the dual functions of perception, the flow of perceptual information to the parietal and temporal lobes simultaneously, one prepares the body to act within reality, and the other constructs an illusionary perception of reality. This was also noted by physicist Richard Feynman in his lecture on space/time, commenting on our inability to perceive space/time as it really is; which is also a fundamental concept found in Hinduism, Buddhism and Taoism. On page 157, Dr. Gazzaniga reports on an experiment in which humans, using the left brain "interpreter," chose the right response 68% of the time, while none-interpreting animals get it right 80% of the time. "While it quickly becomes evident that the top button is being illuminated more often, subjects keep trying to figure out the whole sequence and deeply believe they can. Yet by adopting this strategy, they are rewarded only about 68 percent of the time. If they always press the top button, they are rewarded 80 percent of the time. Rats and other animals are more likely to learn to maximize and press only the top button. It turns out that our right hemisphere behaves like a rat's. It does not try to interpret its experience and find deeper meaning. It continues to live only in the thin moment of the present." This right brain strategy is Taoism at its essence.This book is an interesting read, and highly recommended to anyone who is a student of perception. It will challenge the

Gazzaniga, a neuroscientist, takes the reader along on a journey through the brain. He explains the role of the conscious mind as an interpreter and story teller. He also reminds us of how similar in other ways our brains are to those of other animals. An interesting and enjoyable read.