Mind Wide Open: Your Brain and the Neuroscience of Everyday Life by Steven Johnson

Mind Wide Open: Your Brain and the Neuroscience of Everyday Life Reviews

• 
  Trevor

  If I was to sign up for a religion it would really have to offer me much more than the chance to chant “Holy, Holy, Holy” at the right hand of God for the rest of eternity. One of the things that would nearly sway me would be if it gave me a change to do and be all of the things there just isn’t time in one life to be and do. And if I was converted to this particular religion one of the lives that would be on the top of the list would have to be some sort of brain scientist type person – you know, a neurologist or a cognitive scientist, some sort of brain dude.
  
  This really was a remarkable book about a remarkable journey into the brain of the author. Not just some crappy journey you might expect from one of those horrid 1950s science documentaries … “Let me take you deep inside my brain…” No, nothing like that. This was a literal journey into his brain. Often it involved him being strapped into some god-awful, whirling machine and having to do things so that analysis could be done on him as he was ‘working’.
  
  It is such a great idea for a book and one I would have loved to have come up with – this is precisely the journey I would have liked to have gone on. I could think of nothing better than playing with some of the stuff this guy gets to play with in this book.
  
  There is lots of quite difficult material presented, but always in an interesting and engaging way. In fact, it was so well presented and so fascinating that the book just whizzed by. His discussion of our brain on drugs, for example, was quite fascinating.
  
  But the most interesting parts of this book are the bits about the placebo effect and whether it ‘really exists’. I have always known that the placebo effect accounts for about 30% of the effectiveness of any medical treatment – but had no idea how I knew this. That this isn’t actually the case – that it really depends on the nature of the drug or treatment under consideration – is interesting enough. What is even more interesting is that the placebo effect can even be detectable when you know it is a placebo you are taking. Get your head around that one. You can know you are taking a sugar table and it can still make you feel better! He even goes so far as to say that clinical tests on Valium show that the drug is only effective if you are told you are going to be on it - not if you don't know. Lorena told me off today for suggesting this – but that was what the man said.
  
  This was an interesting book on a truly fascinating subject.
  
• 
  R.f.k

  عندما تسمع خبراً سيئا لك ...ماذا يحدث في دماغك ؟
  فالواقع تنفجر في رأسك أستجابتان في مراكز اللغه والذاكرة تعمل على حل شفرة المعنى وتضعة في مقدمة مركز وعيك، وبنفس الوقت هناك جهاز مساعد في تحت القشرة يستجيب للخبر السي فيفرز هرمون الكورتزول ومواد كميائيه اخرى في عموم مخك وجسدك الكرتزول لايزال يسبح في مجرى دمك بعد مرور ٣٠ ثانية من تلاشي الخبر من ذاكرتك العامة لكن يبقي الشعور فيك حياً.
  (( هذا هو مخك)) وهذا الكتاب يقدم لمحة مبسطه عن التفاعلات الكميائية داخل مخك .
  
  
  
  
  في القرون الاخيرة قدم لنا العلم لمحات رائعة عن جغرافيا المخ لقد أصبح علم المخ وسيلة للاستباط وتفسيرا مابين الواقع الفسيولجي لمخك والحياة الذهنية التي تعيشها بالفعل.
  التهديد بالخطر :
  عندما تتعرض لعمل أرهابي او أنفجار بالمقربة منك او حتى عاصفة ،،،، كيف تتفاعل الكيمياء داخل جسمك مع هذا الحدث؟
  لديك غدة فوق الكلية تفرز دفعات سريعة من الادرينالين لتجهز الجسم لحركة مفاجئة بتحويل الجليكوجين الى جلوكوز الملىء بالطاقة ،،، هذة أستجابة الجسم مزيج من الالآت الفسيلوحية تنطلق بسرعة ودقة بارعة تسمى( أضرب أو أهرب) وهو نظام مستقل عن أرادتك الواعية ،، هذة جميعاً كيمياء المخ الداخلية تنتجها ، تنطلق في ظرف ثواني إما أثارها تتلاشى بدقائق لكن الذكرى الباقية للخوف تستمر طول العمر.
  لنفترض أن معك في هذا الحادث الارهابي او العاصفة زوجتك وأنها في مرحلة الرضاعة هل تكون أستحابتها مثل أستجابتك للخطر؟
  الدراسات أثبتت أن أستجابة المراه في مابعد الولاده او مرحلة الرضاعة يختلف تماماً عن الرجال والنساء الاخرين
  بسبب مادة كميائيه ساحرة أسمها أوكسيتوسين . كيف؟!
  عندما تواجهه او تسمع خبر سي مثل رفضوا ترقيتك او خبر عن أنحراف مسار قطار فيه أصدقا او اقارب لك ينتابك شعور كئيب حزين قلق ولحظات عصيبة، لكن عندما تخبر المراه الواقعه تحت تاثير الاوكسيتونين نفس الخبر والموقف الذي تتعرض له فاأنها لاتخبر نفس الاستجابة التي تعيشهاوالاخبار السئية تتركها بسهوله ويسر .
  الحب :
  أيضاً الحب هو شعور كيميائي شعور له أثر عل أجهزة الذاكره فهو مزيج من الاوكسيتوسين والاندروفينات وهو مزيج محوري بالحب، لكن هذا فقط طيف الحب يستدعي الشعور بالدفء والرضا وليس قصة الحب كامله :)
  تاثير المخدارات:
  مع كل تغير في المزاج مع كل رعشة مع كل لمحة حرمان أنت تخبر إفرازات كميائية للتحكم في عواطفك ، كميائية هي في أساسها ذاتها الكميايئه التي قد تجدها بملعقة كوكاين.
  بعد هذا كله السؤال هنا هل معرفتنا بكيمياء مخك مهمه هل تغير شي ما في حياتك ؟
  لنفترض انك تعاطيت جرعة من المشروم ( مادة مخدرة ) عن علم باأعراضها ، بعد أكثر من ساعة تشعر بالتشويش الحسي ، الالوان واصوات تظهر معاً في نوبات مفاجئه، أنماط من الرقص ستملاء مجالك البصري.
  تصور أنك تعاطيت نفس الجرعة غير مدرك للاعراض وتحول عالمك فجاة الئ هلاوس.
  مالفرق؟ في الحالة الاولى مبهجة ومضيئة في للحالة الثانية يعتبر ضرب من الجنون.
  ماذا حدث؟ المخدر لم يتغير لكن أدراكك للمخدر وأثارة تغير.
  
  
  أنت الان عندما تقرأ هذه المراجعة هذه الكلمات تحت تاثير الكيميائيات التي تكاد لا تختلف بلغة الجزئيات عن المخدارات التي يمكن أن يقبض عليك لو أستعملتها بمكان عام وبمشهد من الجميع :)
  
  بمعنى هذه هي فكرة المخدرات الداخلية التي يقول عنها كاتب هذا الكتاب ان مخك ليس سوى مخدرات ، لكن هناك فرق بينما هو داخلي منها وخارجي، بينما هو طبيعي او صناعي.
  لكن الحقيقة ان المخدرات الاصطناعية تعمل لان مخك يخطي ويظنها طبيعية.
  
  وقائع حدثت بالماضي:
  وقع لك حادث مؤلم ستنفجر ذكرئ هذا الحادث في مخك كل الاستجابة اللاارادية لديك تقودك الى هذه الذكرى
  وهذة حدثت شخصيا لي في العام الماضي في شهر سبتمبر في اليوم التالي من العيد الوطني السعودي كنت انا واختي في السيارة مع السائق خارجه من الجامعة طلبت مني اختي أن نتوقف لشراء غداء رفضت قلت لاحقاً ليس الان ، وقتها كنت اقرا رواية دستو مذكرات من البيت الميت فجاة صدمتنا سيارة اولى وبعدها سيارة اخرى واصبح سيارتنا شبه مقلوبة صوت الاصتطدام كان مرروع جداً حدث هذا في اقل من ثوااااني ، بعدها صحيت بالمستشفئ وبدات اتذكر
  الى الان لا امر بنفس هذا الشارع واذا اضطريت اشعر بخوف لا اعرف مصدره
  كذلك رواية دستو مذكرات من البيت الميت ارتبطت معي بالحادث
  واسئله منها ماذا لو وقفت للمطعم هل ممكن ان يحدث هذا؟
  هذه الحالة تسمى(أضطراب مابعد الصدمة ) PTSD
  يعيشها من خاضوا تجارب حروب من تعرضوا للاضطهاد والاغتصاب وللتعذيب لحظات الاصتطدام تخزن هذه الذكريات طويله الامد في الحصين.
  الحزن: كيف يحدث الحزن ، كيميائيا انخفاض في نشاط مقدمة الجبهة.
  ان القراءه عن المخ ومشاهدة افلام وثائقية عن الكون بالنسبة لي تعتبر متعة لايضاهيها شي للاسف قليل المحتوى العربي عن هذين الموضعين اللي اعتبرهم العالم الفيزيائي ميتشو كاكو أعظم لغزين بالطبيعة.
  
  جميل هذا الكتاب خاصة لغير المختصصين راح تتعرف على نفسك هنا
  
  عندما تتعرض للتهديد والخطر تعرف ان مستوى الادرينالين عندك الان مرتفع في الدم
  عندما تقع في الحب مع احدهم تعرف ان السبب مزيج من الاوكسيتوسين والانردوفينات
  عندما ترجع لك لا ارديا تفاصيل حادث او موقف عصيب عانيتة تعرف انك تحت حال أضطراب مابعد الصدمة
  عندما تشعر بالخوف تعرف ان لديك ارتفاع في مستوى تنبية الاميجدالية.
  عندنا ترى بعض من الناس يعجز عن اتخاذ القرارات المنطقية السليمة تفكر في انهم ممكن بعانون عطب في مراكز العاطفة في الجهاز الحافي.
  مشكله الكتاب بدائي الترجمة الحرفية وصعب عل غير الدارسيين بهذا المجال ، كذلك المصظلحات الطبيية العربية ابدا غير مفهومة تحتاح ترجع لاخر الكتاب للبحث عن المعنئ.
  
  
  
  
  
  لكن السؤال اللي اجى ببالي بعد قراءه هذا الكتاب من نحن حقاً في صومعة كل هالتفاعلات الكميائية ؟
  
  
  
  
• 
  Charlene

  Disturbingly simple depiction of the mind. Johnson is unquestionably in awe of the brain. His awe seems to have impaired his skepticism. The result is that he sensationalized what he learned and at times provided absolutely false information as if it were fact.
  
  For example, He is under the assumption that the better people are at reading emotions, the more extroverted. Where is the evidence for such an absurd claim? This is why extraverts often misdiagnose introverts with autism, when in fact they are not even on the spectrum. Worse, despite being around some of the most respected neuroscientists the world has to offer, he was still holding tight to the myth that people only use 10% of their brains. It's absurd. These are only two examples of the many. He really didn't have a good enough grasp of neuroscience to write this book. Some journalists and science writers can swing it, but he is not nearly skeptical enough to pull it off.
  
  The book's target audience seems to be those who also have no education in the neurosciences. Sadly, those people will believe what he is saying because he included work from very respected researchers who have conducted some pretty good studies. He related their work as well as many of his own assumptions. The very way in which he ties together the bits of information he gleaned from the researchers really demonstrates his lack of understanding. For him to have written a book to educate others seems grossly irresponsible. I would highly suggest finding an introductory book written by an actual scientist instead.
• 
  Chrisl

  Johnson opens with a quote from Keats
  
  " ... let winged Fancy wander
  Through the thought still spread beyond her:
  Open wide mind's cage-door ..."
  
  While reading Johnson's pages about the behavioral theory of Robert Cloninger, his theory and research showing that personalities result partly from the relative balance of neurotransmitters, I came across this quote that seemed to fit :
  
  “Or you could be a fearless reward-independent novelty seeker, always searching out new experiences without any real concern for whether they are dangerous or even pleasurable …”
  
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C._Robe...
  
  (Would like to see test result for some people in the 'news' of Cloninger's test of "Temperament and Character"
  
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tempera...
  
  Quoting from
  
  https://www.sciencedirect.com/science...
  "Cloninger's psychobiological model identifies four dimensions of temperament (Novelty seeking, Harm avoidance, Reward dependence and Persistence) and three dimensions of character (Self-directedness, Cooperativeness and Self-transcendence). The FFM proposes the domains of Extraversion, Agreeableness, Conscientiousness, Neuroticism and Openness as the basic dimensions underlying individual differences. ..."
• 
  Giedra

  I really liked this book. Each chapter focused on a different aspect of the mind. For example, one chapter discussed our ability to "mindread" other people, referring to how we can read subtle cues about a person's mood, whether they are lying, etc. from their facial expressions, tone, etc. and we have no idea we can even do this. He points out that we DO usually sense that we enjoy conversing with some people more than others even when the content of hte conversations is largely the same, and posits that this may often be because you "click" with someone in terms of being able to optimally mindread one another. Another chapter provided insights into ADD/ADHD and how what we call "attention" is really more than 1 skill (there is auditory attention, visual attention, then the ability to switch back and forth or decide which external stimuli to ignore, etc.) Talked about using a neurofeedback machine that reads brainwaves to train kids to be more attentive--the system uses a video game in which successful movement of your "guy" only happens when you are focused in a particular way. ADHD kids using the system report that now they understand what it's supposed to feel like when they are reading.
  
  Many interesting things to ponder. I will enjoy rereading it as well, as you can easily take what you learn from this book and recognize that certain things going on in your own life are attributable to this or that neurotransmitter/attention skill/mindreading ability or lack thereof. Then realizing these things, you might be able to train yourself to overcome certain deficiences or to do things to compensate.
  
  My only complaint was that the last chapter got all Freud-talkie and was nearly as impenetrable as Freud(trying to explain what things from Freud are still worthy of being part of our lexicon and which things just have to be completely tossed based on what we know from brain science). Just plain dull after all the interesting reading that came before.
• 
  Bettie

  Description: Mind Wide Open speaks to brain buffs, self-obsessed neurotics, barstool psychologists, mystified parents, grumpy spouses, exasperated managers, and anyone who enjoys speculating and gossiping about the motivations and behaviors of other human beings. Steven Johnson shows us the transformative power of understanding brain science and offers new modes of introspection and tools for better parenting, better relationships, and better living.
• 
  Lauren Kampwirth

  Yep. I'm a neuroscience nerd.
• 
  M.M

  رغم اهمية الموضوع، لكن يعلم الله إني بذلت جهد ذهني فوق العادي حتى احاول افهم لكن الترجمة السيئة كانت عائق ..
• 
  الشناوي محمد جبر

  سجن العقل
  ستيفين جونسون
  ترجمة/ أحمد مستجير
  .....................
  تستهويني الكتب التي تتحدث عن العقل، وقدراته البحوث الدائرة حوله، تستوي في ذلك الكتب التي تتحدث من منظور فلسفي، او التي تتحدث من منظور علمي، لذلك حظي هذا الموضوع بعدد من قراءاتي هذا العام.
  وللدكتور مستجير مكانة خاصة بين المترجمين العرب في الميدان العلمي، لذلك فإن اسم الدكتور مستجير علي غلاف أي كتاب يعتبر ضمان بجودة المادة العلمية المعروضة فيه.
  في هذا الكتاب (أكثر قليلا من 200 صفحة) يعرض المؤلف بعض البحوث الجديدة في علم العقل، أو المخ والأعصاب، ويربط بين مجموعة من البحوث تحت عنوان سجن العقل، حيث الإطار العام للكتاب يدور حول مدي سيطرة كيمياء المخ علي السلوك الإنساني.
  يتحدث المؤلف عن رؤية العقل، فيذكر بعض البحوث حول تصوير العقل أثناء نشاط المخ الذهني، كما تحدث عن دور الهرمونات _ الكيمياء _ في حفز سلوكيات معينة، وتسبيط سلوكيات غيرها، كما تحدث عن البحوث حول الموصلات الكيميائية العصبية ودورها في توجيه السلوك الإنساني، كما يعرض الكاتب لبعض حوادث الاقتران الشرطي ودور الارتباط الشرطي في تشكيل السلوك الإنساني.
  هذا الكتاب يلخص فكرة أن الإنسان رهين وسجين في سلوكه لكيمياء عقله، وأن ما يقال عن الحرية السلوكية للإنسان غير صحيح.
  ما يعيب الكتاب أن ترجمته سيئة جدا وهذا غير متوقع من مترجم مثل الدكتور مستجير، كما أن البحوث التي قدمها دليلا علي فكرته تعتبر كلها قديمة، ومعروفة منذ زمن طويل.
  
• 
  Tina

  This is a pretty fascinating book. It gets a little annoying whenever Johnson tries to pimp it out as a self-help book ("learning about your brain can help you!" blah blah), but luckily, it's NOT a self-help book -- it's an informative book about how your brain functions and how he went about exploring (via MRI and neurofeedback, etc.) about how his brain works. (I'm guessing he thought trying to pass it off as self-help would increase his audience?)
  
  The chapter on attention was a tiny bit dull for me in some parts, but this might have been b/c I was already pretty familiar with most of the info. (This is pretty much the extent of the usefulness of my psych degree.) But the info about the connections between emotion and memory, and the evolutionary purpose behind laughter and play -- stuff like that was really interesting. It's also a fairly quick, easy, layperson-targeted read, so you get to learn great stuff without giving yourself a headache. I recommend this one to my science nerd friends, or really, anyone who's interested in an introduction to how the brain works.
• 
  Kirsten

  This is a really excellent look at how neuroscience relates to our everyday emotional lives. One of the most interesting bits to me was the discussion of the way that we remember trauma. Research now shows that a lot of conventional wisdom about trauma is flat-out wrong; in particularly, this book suggests that if "talking out" a traumatic event reproduces the fear response (increased heart rate, etc.), it may cause the fear produced by the memories to become more firmly etched, not less. This means that talk therapy might not actually be the most effective treatment for survivors, especially if the trauma is recent.
  
  It can be kind of eerie to realize that so much of what we experience emotionally is related to chemicals flowing about in your brain, but I found it fascinating. I'm pretty used to the idea in some ways already, since I take medication to control my depression, but this book has really sparked my interest and I'm planning on seeking out some of the books that he mentions in his excellent footnotes.
• 
  Giselle Odessa

  كتاب مبسط عن العقل و تأثير كيمياء المخ على افعالنا و تصرفاتنا، و كيف يعمل ويستجيب المخ تحت ظروف مختلفة من خطر و خوف و مواقف عاطفية.
  الكتاب بسيط و جيد للمبتدئين في القراءة عن العقل، لكن الترجمة لم تكن بالمستوى الذي يليق بكتاب علمي.
• 
  Ahmed Aref

  الكتاب ممتاز , لكن الترجمه ليست مناسبة نهائيا وفيها شيى من التعقيد
  في توصيل مايريدة الكاتب "الكتاب علمي ولاتناسبة ترجمه صارمه مثل هذه ..
• 
  B. Rule

  This book is fine but it's on the level of a breezy magazine piece. The picture it presents of the brain is a vastly simplified one, and the set-pieces Johnson delivers in each chapter skate along the surface of the implications of modern neuroscience for philosophy, sociology, politics, etc. It turns out all the rich detail got dumped in the endnotes, but my opinion of the book was well set before I got to them. This would have been a much better book if that detail had been incorporated into the body of the work. As it stands, this doesn't delve much beyond the level of "wow, did you know you can do biofeedback and fMRIs to see how the brain has an actual architecture, and your mind is actually made up of a bunch of subsystems for various tasks like pattern-matching, visual acuity, different types of attentionality, etc. I won't bore you with the details, but cool, huh?!"
• 
  Kareem

  كتاب جميل بيناقش ظواهر من الNeuroscience باسلوب سهل وشيق، سبب كون الكتاب ده مميز عن أي كتاب تاني من نفس النوع هو إنه بيحاول يجمع بين البيولوجي في نظريات تطور داروين وبين السيكولوجي في افكار فرويد، عشان يطلع بنموذج مبسط لطريقة عمل الدماغ ودراستها. الكتاب ناقش اكتر من موضوع زي علم الأعصاب، قراءة الأفكار، الانتباه ونقصه، التوحد، غرايز الخوف وطريقة عمل الذاكرة.
  
  ودي شوية معلومات لطيفة لفتت نظري:
  
  - سبب انك لما تدوخ وتوقف فجأة بتحس إن الدنيا بتلف بيك هو إن جسمك بيحدد موقعك وحركتك عن طريق العين وسائل الأذن الوسطى، لما بتوقف فجأة العين بتقول انك وقفت إنما السائل بيستمر لعدة ثوان، وعشان عقلك مش عارف مين فيهم غلط، بيفترض إن الإثنين صح فطالما فيه دوران وعينك بتقول انك وقفت، عقلك بيقنعك إن الاوضة هي اللي بتلف بيك.
  
  - اللي بيخلي اللي بيتعاطى مخدرات يحس إنه سامع اصوات، هو إن العقل عبارة عن وحدات لكل واحدة دور معين ووظيفة معينة، عشان ساعات لما واحدة تبوظ متأثرش على التانية، المخدرات بتنشط وحدات معينة مسؤولة عن السمع والإبصار، وده اللي بيسبب هلاوس.
  
  - الستات عندهم قدرة اكبر على ملاحظة التفاصيل واستشعار المعاني الخفية للنظرات والكلمات عشان التجويف اللي بيربط بين النص الايمن والايسر في المخ أوسع عند الستات من الرجالة.
  
  - الاطفال بيخافوا اكثر عشان الاميجدالا (جزء الدماغ المسؤول عن المخاوف) عندهم متبتبقاش لسه تطورت.
  
  - هرمون الاندروفين مش بيُفرز إلا مع الضحكة الحقيقة مش المصطنعة، لو عايز تفرق بينهم شوف انكماش العين وميل الحاجب لأسفل. (بسمة دوتشين)
  
  - فيه ناس كتير فاكرة إن الذكريات متسجلة في مجلدات في الذاكرة ولما بتفتكرها فكأنك بتفتح كتاب في المكتبة وتقراه بصوت عالي، لكن الحقيقة إتك بتعيد كتابة الذكريات كل مرة تفتكرها فيها إعادة التعزيز ( فرويد سماها النشاط الارتجاعي) وبتزود تأثيرها عليك اكتر.
  
  - ذاكرتك بتخزن الذكريات الايجابية والسلبية وكمان المباغتة، يعني كلمة مش متوقعة، رأي غريب، حد شتمك من غير ما تعمله حاجة، والغرض من الذكريات دي هو الطمع في خلق نمط يخليك متتفاجئش المرة الجاية.
  
  - فيه ظاهرة مشهورة اسمها فطنة السلم، ودي عبارة عن إنك مش بتفتكر الرد الصحيح اللي كنت هتقصف بيه جبهة الراجل اللي احرجك في المكتب، غير وانت نازل على السلم ورايح بيتك، لإن الإحراج ده كان شئ غير متوقع بالنسبالك، وعقلك بيفضل يعيد عليك ردود مناسبة للخناقات القديمة عشان المرة الجاية محدش يعرف يباغتك.
  
  - ذكرياتك المخيفة والسلبية ليها صفتين: عدم الوضوح والتشتت، وفي نفس الوقت التركيز على التأثيرات المحيطة. يعني لو عربية خبطتك عدم الوضوح بيساعدك يبقي خوفك شامل لكل العربيات مش العربية الزرقاء اللي خبطتك بس، أما الحاجات المحيطة فتبقى زي الاصوات اللي حواليك، صوت الكلاكس أو حتى واحد بيصرخ او قطار ماشي الناحية الثانية، ودي غرضها تلقط أي شئ ممكن يكون إشارة للخطر في المستقبل.
  
  - استرجاع الذكريات ب��زود قوة العاطفة المصاحبة ليها، الwires اللي في دماغك بتبقى أقوى، عامل زي كاوتش العربية اللي كل ما تدوس بنزين كل ما يغرس ويحفر في الرمل اكتر، عشان كده لما تحصل حاجة تضايقك المرة الجاية حاول متفكرش فيها كتير ولو فكرت حاول تربطها بمشاعر جديدة متضايقش زي انك تفرض مبرر ليها او تحط نفسك مكان حد تاني، في حين لو حاجة حلوة حصلتلك استرجعها كل شوية عشان تقوى في ذاكرتك وتحسن مودك.
  
  - ظاهرة تطابق المود Mood congruity هدفها استقرار نفسيتك، ودي بتساعدك لما تفكر في ذكريات سعيدة بإنها تفكرّك ببقية الذكريات السعيدة وتخلي مودك مستقر، لكن للاسف في نفس الوقت بتعمل نفس الحاجة مع الذكريات السيئة، جرب تصحى الصبح تفتكر موقف محرج حصلك واتفرج علي ذاكرتك بقية اليوم وهي بتجيبلك الف موقف شبهه مكنوش على بالك، والبس بقى يا معلم.
  
  - مريضة عند دكتور كاباريد كانت حالتها زي حالة كريم عبد العزيز في فيلم فاصل ونعود وذاكرتها قصيرة المدى مش شغالة، لكن لما الدكتور حط دبوس في ايده وهو بيسلم عليها، لاقاها خافت من السلام المرة اللي بعدها من غير ما تفتكر الدبوس .. عشان الصدمة هي طريقة تعلم الخوف وده بيفسر إن المخ عبارة عن وحدات وإن الذاكرة لو مشتغلتش فاكتساب الخوف موجود في مناطق مجهولة من الوعي منفصلة عن الذاكرة العادية.
  
  - الحزن بيسبب خمود في نشاط قشرة مقدمة الجبهة بينما الفرح يسبب العكس، والمنطقة دي مسؤولة عن الكرياتيفتي وإنتاج الأفكار، يعني ببساطة وانت حزين بتبقى أغبى!
• 
  Bucket

  Steven Johnson explores neuroscience in a very accessible way by describing his journey to understand his own brain. He submits himself to MRIs, biofeedback machines, neurofeedback machines, and other neurological testing to gain insight into how his own brain (and all of our brains too) function on a daily basis.
  
  He closes with a section about Freud, and how neuroscience, while showing the need to update or alter some of Freud's theories about psychoanalysis, does not totally replace them. Johnson posits that understanding the neuroscience and acknowledging the role that biology and even geneology play doesn't mean that we are somehow locked into behaving a certain way or that the poetic, psychological, literary, and philosophical interpretations of how our minds work suddenly go out the window. Instead, each of these interpretations have their place.
  
  Johnson also states that understanding a little more about the chemical and biological mechanisms in his brain actually makes him feel less limited and more in control. Knowledge is power, rah rah!
  
  Particularly interesting insights to me:
  
  Using 10% of our brains most of the time isn't a bad thing; instead it's efficient. Our brains are composed of dozens of different tools that serve different purposes. If we used all of them at once, the sheer volume of information and input would leave us unable to function. Our brain uses the 10% (or so) that is directly tied to whatever task we're working on.
  
  His findings turn conventional wisdom about dealing with trauma on its head. We all know we're supposed to "talk it out" when something traumatic or painful happens, and "not brag" when something wonderful and exciting happens. However, reliving memories and their associated emotions makes them stronger. Therefore talking about the painful can reinforce it and ensure the emotional response remains long after, and keeping something great quiet may cause us to lose the great emotional feeling that came with it.
  
  Our limbic brain is more or less responsible for emotional responses and our neocortex is more or less responsible for intellection and thinking. These systems work together, but at different speeds. The limbic brain learns slowly and remains in various emotional states longer, whereas the neocortex learns (and moves on) very quickly. This explains those moments where you feel stressed or anxious and don't know why. Then when you think for a moment, you remember something that you just heard that was stress-inducing and that your neocortex had moved on from before your limbic brain was finished reacting.
  
  There's also a fascinating section of the book about our abillity to detect emotion - subconsciously and in a split second. We're not just talking happy and sad here, but 412 different "discrete emotional concepts." All this is handled by our limbic system; in fact, bringing your neocortex into play and trying to analyze the emotions on someone's face will make your reading less accurate that going with your split-second decision.
  
  Themes: neuroscience, psychological, self-knowledge, technology, personality
• 
  Daniel Hadley

  What Johnson does well is break down complex scientific topics with clear prose and interesting real life examples. Sometimes I sense that he is oversimplifying things, but overall I like his style.
  
  Here's the good news: we can read minds. Our brains can read subtle clues in facial expressions, body language and voice intonations. This happens in the subconscious, below our radar (or, outside of the "Executive Branch," as Johnson calls the conscious mind). Pretty cool.
  
  We also are high on drugs all the time. Many of the same chemicals that make crack so much fun can be had in ordinary situations.
  
  My only beef with the book: it glosses over or doesn't address some major debates in neuroscience. It sidesteppes the whole debate over the role of evolutionary psychology by saying that we are products of both nature and nurture. Mostly, though, I would have liked to see more about the debates over free will that are happening in neuroscience circles. To get that, I think I will read Wegner's boook, The Illusion of Conscious Will, which I skimmed once in the bookstore.
• 
  Skip (David) Everling

  Good book. I think I would have given this a higher rating if I had read it when it was published in 2004, since I've read a half-dozen books since then that explore similar material. Indeed the more recent books from contemporaries like
  Malcolm Gladwell and
  Jonah Lehrer, Blink and How We Decide (respectively) are good examples, get the benefit of more recent studies and analysis. None of this is Johnson's fault of course, which is why I feel compelled to note it here, but it affected my engagement with the book nonetheless.
  
  Still, Johnson has his own perspectives and niches of interest even looking at the same clinical psychology, and the book offered a refreshing dose of open-mindedness about the brain and how we might learn to tune it more precisely with emerging neuroscience.
• 
  Stephanie Hinds

  I agree with other readers that this book contained mostly information I already knew. This was not unexpected as it is roughly my field of expertise and the book was published in 2004- written about current understanding of the brain. The brain is our body's most complex organ, & perhaps the most complex thing known to man. Within 5 years of my completing school, fundamental ideas about the brain (ex. We don't grow new neurons) were not only being challenged but being disproven. All that being said, I approached the book with modest expectations and was very pleased. I read it in a single setting, way into the night. I was most impressed by the author's skill in drawing parallels btw neurophysiology & common life experiences, making complex topics easily accessible to anyone interested.
• 
  Debra Blasi

  Johnson explores the physiology of his own brain and, ergo, ours in this mainstream (i.e., not esoteric) book. His thesis is right: the more we know how our brains actually function, the more control we have over how and what we think and do. Example: Your body continues producing emotional symptoms to a fear or anxiety (like racing heartbeat, sweaty palms, knotted stomach) after your brain has moved onto other tepid topics. Therefore we sometimes *feel* toward subjects that are no longer irrelevant to our fear, irritation, joy, or other emotions.
• 
  Grace

  Steven Johnson wanted to know what his brain was doing when he felt/did different things, why he felt/did different things, and to what extent all human brains are the same/different. He went to lots of specialists, got hooked up to various brain-reading machines and wrote this book about his experiences. It was really fun to read and really interesting. Warning: it does offer theories explaining how chemicals in our brain are responsible for all emotions, including love, so if you don't want to think of love as a chemical reaction in your brain, you may want to skip that chapter.
• 
  Steele Dimmock

  This is a solid intro in to Brain Science worthy of 3.5 stars.
  
  I got a few things out of it:
  * Freud attracted a large audience because you didn't need to be mentally ill to get something out of it
  * Duchenne smiles
  * Experiments prove that Human's remember pain in a separate location from memories
  * Your brain is nothing but drugs, constantly going in and out
  * One of the effects of Prozac is the removal of rejection sensitivity
  * Prefrontal Cortex function is reduced when you are sad and increased when you are happy.
• 
  Lance Agena

  Read like a magazine article. Light reading, but I expected less of a personal narrative and more referenced studies. He provided notes at the back, but it didn't complement the main text as it should have — it felt like the notes provided an excuse for not writing about the the subject in depth. It did have some interesting parts though. However, if I really wanted further information, I suspect I'd have to read a book by one of the scientists he references.
• 
  Erica

  Not one of my favorite Steven Johnson books. Although the premise for the book is an interesting one--that the basics of neuroscience can provide us with tools to discover new things about our attitudes and actions on an everyday basis--I felt the book was just too navel-gazing. When in doubt, Johnson talked about himself and his issues. A set of short case studies might have been more interesting.
• 
  Courtney

  I learned that there is a module in our brain that inherently fears snakes...and garden hoses, and vacuum cleaner cords, and anything else that might be mistaken for one.
• 
  Noor

  
  
  أعتقد ان كل الكتب المتعلقه بمحاولة فهم طريقه عمل الدماغ معقدة مهما حاول المؤلف
  
  واذا كانت مترجمه حيزداد التعقيد
  
  افادني بصورة ما واتمنى ان ابقى محتفظه بتلك المعلومات
• 
  J Crossley

  This book was very interesting. The author looks at the brain, what it can accomplish, and recent research regarding the brain. The chapter on the ability to mindread other people explains how we can react to others by reading subtle cues and microexpressions. While empathy takes longer, mindreading happens in rapid-fire time.
  
  The sections regarding ADD and autism explains that it is not so much issues with “attention” but has to do with different skills. These skills, such as visual attention, auditory attention, and stored memories give us information. We need to decide what to listen to and what to ignore. It could be that for people with ADD and autism that they are disregarding important information and listening to unimportant details.
  
  Memory and trauma are discussed, and recent research is showing that each time you relate a traumatic event it becomes more entrenched in your mind. This is due to a couple of things. One is that memory is more fluent; it is not “set in stone.” Also, when you recount a stressful/traumatic event, your brain floods with chemicals that make you feel like you are in the traumatic event again. Talk therapy may not be the best option given the recent studies.
  
  The author explains that knowing about how the chemicals in his brain work, it gives him power because he can be more in control. He states at the beginning of the book that talking about the brain and its sections can get very detailed. He decided not to go that detailed so that the book is accessible to everyone. He also participates in the scans and testing, so that gives a human element rather than just being a dry textbook reading of research.
  
• 
  EMMANUEL

  I honestly don't know what I was reading. This book really was deceiving. The title of the book suggested a context that I was interested in. But. Then. When I read the book. I was completely disengaged. Not because the information was not accurate. The information did have accuracy in of its own rational. But. What deterred myself from being engaged with the book was because the book's context was completely disenfranchising the significance of the biological and medical implications associated with the academic discipline of Neuroscience. I was also disengaged from the book because I didn't have any understanding of how the Academic industry of Neuroscience can be rationaled, other in of its default association - "Neuroscience is in of the academic discipline and research insight of how the brain works through medical scientific application and methods of research, that explain the social implications and realities of everyday social reality and social default understood behavior and relationships."