This Will Make You Smarter
By John Brockman
- Release Date: 2012-02-14
- Genre: Psychology
Description
Featuring a foreword by David Brooks, This Will Make You Smarter presents brilliant—but accessible—ideas to expand every mind.
What scientific concept would improve everybody’s cognitive toolkit? This is the question John Brockman, publisher of Edge.org, posed to the world’s most influential thinkers. Their visionary answers flow from the frontiers of psychology, philosophy, economics, physics, sociology, and more. Surprising and enlightening, these insights will revolutionize the way you think about yourself and the world.
Contributors include: Daniel Kahneman on the “focusing illusion” Jonah Lehrer on controlling attention Richard Dawkins on experimentation Aubrey De Grey on conquering our fear of the unknown Martin Seligman on the ingredients of well-beingNicholas Carr on managing “cognitive load” Steven Pinker on win-win negotiating Daniel Goleman on understanding our connection to the natural worldMatt Ridley on tapping collective intelligence Lisa Randall on effective theorizing Brian Eno on “ecological vision” J. Craig Venter on the multiple possible origins of life Helen Fisher on temperament Sam Harris on the flow of thought Lawrence Krauss on living with uncertainty
Reviews
Excellent
5By Iamawesome69I would file handsome smitty's review under most idioticThe New Collectivist's Bible
2By Handsome SmittyThis work is little more than a tool to shape Collectivist thought. A collection of scientific expressions that have more to do with as closed a belief system as any religion on Earth (I'm sorry - this 'planet,' since many of its contributors seem to detest any form of Individualist expression). Ponder me this, though: If the new Quantum Theory seems to indicate it is possible that matter created itself out of total nothingness (which has to include the vacuum of what we call Space), then why isn't it as likely a Self-Aware Intelligence (I'll abstain from using the C or G-words) could also spring from nothing? Where's the numbers to prove or disprove such a possibility? Are these esteemed scientists incapable of considering such a probability because they cannot see outside our understanding of 'consciousness?' I admit I'm enjoying at least the writing quality in this collection, if not the expression, which is so disappointing. I find the free thinkers of Science as boxed-in as the fundamentalists of Religion.
