Customer Reviews

Strangers to Ourselves: Discovering the Adaptive Unconscious

5 star:		(3)
4 star:		(5)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

Timothy Wilson enters the structure erected by Sigmund Freud a century ago bearing a wrecking bar and fresh wall paint. Freud's concept of the unconscious is in dire need of updating, Wilson contends, but not demolished entirely. The construction can be refurbished with modern research. Instead of the unconscious being hidden away until a psychotherapist teases it back into view, says Wilson, its effects can be detected by new observing techniques - even done in the laboratory setting. In fact, the author argues, much of the unconscious is there to help us through our daily lives. We just don't perceive its role or influence. In an easily read and nearlycomprehensive account of how over the past century psychology has revised the Freudian construction, Wilson has produced a shiny, almost new edifice. Sadly, the structure lacks a foundation.

Wilson points out that our brains are the result of life's evolutionary process. There is the ancient, rapidly responding elements inherited from ancient ancestors. There is also the rather cumbersome, plodding segment, more recently acquired by our species. In fact, it may be that which distinguishes our species. The ancient parts drive us to jump back when we see a long, slim, dark shape on the ground while walking in the woods. The newer, slower cognitive functions allow us to detect the object has bark and knots - it's a twig, not a snake. Although Wilson is anxious for us to understand our brains are based on an evolutionary foundation, he's quick to dismiss the nascent science of evolutionary psychology as "too extreme" in comparing us to other animals. His field is psychology, not ethology, and he's not willing to surrender his role. He's also unwilling to "reduce" the mind to something in common with other animals - or allow it to be compared with computers.

His concept of "adaptive unconscious" is a compromise between Freud's dark realm and the realities of evolutionary biology - tilting toward the Freudian side. Wilson demonstrates how in many ways our "adaptive unconscious" influences us. There's confabulation - contriving reasons for behaviour we can't immediately explain. Wilson deems us "the ultimate spin doctor" for projecting how good we are - both to others and to ourselves. There's the problem of whether emotion is reflected in changes of body condition - or vice versa. The wide variety of expressions of adaptive unconscious behaviours is amply and ably spelled out in this book. Perhaps no topic drives his thesis home more vividly than the segment "Are You Racist", still a major topic in Wilson's [and other] nations. The section is a glaring example of what is going on within our minds without our being aware of it.

Wilson's underlying theme is that the adaptive unconscious is the ultimate multi-tasking device. It is not a single entity, as Freud would have us believe, but a complex mix of motivating and reacting mental elements that play a significant role in our lives. At the bottom, it's things like breathing and heartbeat; at higher levels, it's rapid breathing and faster heartbeat in time of stress. The adaptive unconscious goes beyond our sense of self, however. It's also fundamental in how we deal with others. We may "rationalise" our behaviour in our own minds, but we act as our own "spin doctor" in actions toward family, friends or workmates. It's the latter that concerns Wilson in turning our mental "CEO" into a responsive, cooperating social element. If we can rationalise improper or inept behaviour, why not reverse the process and tell our adaptive unconscious how to react. Wilson doesn't say we're able to utterly reverse personalities, but we can choose which actions to emphasise and repeat. "Do good to be good" is a common saying and the author thinks that can work. However, given that we've only just shed Freud's "subconscious" with this book, it will be a long time to see if this new form of "operant conditioning" actually works. Let alone how.

What is missing in this otherwise fine overview is discussion of the underlying roots of what is driving the systems. The information on brain science touching on these topics is nil. In a science where brain mapping and data on the flow of neurotransmitters is almost daily news, this is a glaring omission. Even the single case of testing students in their reactions to a film while injected with either a stimulant or a depressive only indicates to Wilson that reactions vary. This is an unfortunate aspect in an otherwise good summary. [stephen a. haines - Ottawa, Canada]

Presents some interesting ways of looking at our ways of thinking. Complete with reviews of the scientific literature.

Very good ideas and particularly interesting scientific studies behind the ideas.

The thorough nature of the book makes its message a bit redundant and drawn out. Still recommended though.

Strangers to Ourselves is a clearly written and important book identifying the various internal walls impeding self-knowledge and providing advice on how we might enhance our ability to surmount them. The former constitutes the more interesting aspect of Wilson's book. His contention is that "human personality resides in two places: in the adaptive unconscious and in the conscious construal of the self." The latter is often deceptive, the former inaccessible. Much of the difficulty we face in getting an accurate assessment of our self stems the existence of our "adaptive unconciousness," that set of mental processes that influence our behavior "behind the scenes," as it were. For all its important influence, our adaptive conciousness remains beyond the accessibility of our conscious. So, how are we to achieve his second objective; that of trying to improve our self-knowledge? On this question, Wilson does not abandon us, though he does concede that there are limits to what we can do. The development of self-narratives, trying to observe ourselves as though we were outside ourselves (like the mathematician who solved a problem he found otherwise intractable until he managed to transform himself as his friend, John Nash, and approach the problem from Nash's vantage point), and altering our behavior in advance of attitudinal change are among his proposals for deepening self-understanding. In all, an excellent source for the general reader to come to grips with him or herself. I know, if my adaptive unconciousness could reach me, that it would agree!

This book it is dealing with a fascinating aspect of human nature that is somewhat less emphasized by many other authors. I highly recommend reading it - (and to the reviewer from Finland: so does Tor Norretranders, see his review in New Scientist). Having read this book, I see differently, more clearly, issues like: How much do we know ourselves? How accurately can we describe ourselves? How much can we predict ourselves? Advice ourselves and others? How much control we have on our decisions?

The reason I didn't give the book 5 stars is that I've noticed the author sometimes misinterpreted data, or at least ignore other possible explanations. Also, is seems that he is frequently swimming comfortably in main stream, not questioning common assumptions that became questionable is recent years. As readers we can easily "inherit" biases. Just a sample: The author suggestion we learn about ourselves from what others think of us. However, as implied from the book itself, others have their own (unconscious) agenda, they have no means, and frequently no desire, to see us in objective eyes. Therefore, I keep (in my conscious mind) a question mark next to the author's explanations, probably a good thing to do with any author. Although this might seem like as a severe shortcoming, the book is nevertheless very enriching. Just by asking the questions and bringing the facts, it gives one a new perspective on oneself and others.

This book asserts that we rarely know much about our own minds, what we do know is sometimes wrong, and moreover, that introspection is often powerless to help us to better self-knowledge. Not only that, but perfect strangers can sometimes tell us things about our personality that we didn't know.

Wilson, a psychology professor, is not really going out on a limb here, but rather reporting the strong results of recent research (some of which is his own) on the "adaptive unconscious". The new view of the mind that is gradually being built up by controlled experiments is often at variance with Freud's compelling but fanciful views on the unconscious and repression. The current model has the mind composed of a conscious part and, perhaps, several unconscious parts, each of which has a special ability, like recognizing faces, responding to emergencies, or selective remembering and forgetting. The author normally lumps these specialized parts together for purposes of discussion, since his intent is to contrast our conscious mind with our unconscious, and to re-evaluate what it is we can know about ourselves through examining our conscious motives, thoughts, and feelings.

Anyone who has ever been surprised at an emotion that has come over him, seemingly from nowhere, or by his actions in a new situation knows how disconcerting it can be. Are one's conscious emotions just fake - placeholders for real feelings that well up when one isn't looking? Are one's firm intentions just flimsy self-deceptions that are blown away by the right circumstances? It's probably not that bad (usually!), but we should know just how much of what we feel and think and think we remember is under our conscious control. The author is not really in the self-help business, but he does recommend several things we can do to find our real selves - and even to change. His tone is modest but hopeful: it's true that self-knowledge is elusive, but one can find out important things about one's self by indirect means. One can even influence one's unconscious, so change is possible. Perhaps an introvert will never become the life of the party, but he can take action to readjust his socializing comfort level so as to at least enjoy the party.

This book will interest someone who wants to see what sorts of things psychologists are learning about the mind these days, or who just wants to learn some things about his own mind. I liked it. In spite of the fact that much of the time we are running on autopilot, Wilson by no means absolves us of the responsibility for our actions, and gives us techniques and suggestions that help us to control our (often obstreperous) unconscious minds. Most usefully, he points out that self-knowledge is not simply "there", nor is it particularly easy to get. On the other hand, he made me realize that there is a new person that I might want to know better - myself.

The book that carried the most influence on my thinking this year (I went back to it half a dozen times).
This is a clearly written presentation of our inability to forecast our own behavior and to predict our emotional reactions to positive and negative events. One would think that the repetition of experiences with consistent forecasting biases would lead to some correction but this is not the case.
We are more resilient than we think ("immune neglect"). The book also discusses the reversion to baseline happiness after what we thought would bring a permanent improvement in our moods (yet we never learn from it).
The most important part covers the "hindsight bias" how we see past misfortunes as deterministic --and how we can confront negative emotions by making them even more so (by creating a narrative that make the events appear unavoidable).

I was happy yesterday to see Dr. Wilson's book included in the New York Times Magazine "Year in Ideas -- 2002" because it is a book worth reading, even if you see shortcomings in its analysis. I find the author blurs or misses an important distiction -- for example, most people can tell you fairly accuratelely their personal level of 'social interest' (low, medium, high) but they can't tell you why they have the level of social interest that they do. So they make up stories that inaccurately 'explain' their level of social interest. BUT if a person has read Alfred Adler's theory (and research confirming it) that birth order influences one's level of social interest, with middle borns averaging highest and only children and first borns averaging lowest in social interest, THEN but only then can a person make an insightful statement about one aspect of why she or he possesses a particular level of social interest. Thus, self-reports about some things are often accurate, while being inaccurate about other things. This example illustrates an overlooked theme -- studying the best psychological theory and research is another good way to understand oneself.

A key issue for me in the unconscious, adaptive and maladaptive, is the quest for self-insight into negative thoughts, feelings, and tendencies -- such as worry, anxiety, and pessimism. Dr. Wilson's book can be a useful adjunct here, but only if one gets a better understanding of what might be "adaptive" about the human tendency toward negativity that many of us share. The adaptive function of negativity concerns playing through worst case scenarios and avoiding unrealistic optimism so that one is prepared for things in life that do not go well. Therefore, a person inclined to negativity might be better off studying the adaptive value of that psychological strategy, explained in Dr. Norem's book The Positive Power of Negative Thinking, rather that getting the idea from Dr. Wilson that acting as if one were an optimist will help you become an optimist. This example shows that there remain many complexities as yet unresolved in personality psychology. Dr. Wilson's interpretation and application of self-perception theory is indeed interesting, but while studying it one should not forget the richness of individual differences, the subtleties of cognitive strategies, or the complexities of human nature. I recommend always probing the adaptive function of a psychological phenomenon before trying to change it toward a superficial cultural ideal or stereotype, which may not really be as adaptive or functional as it first appears. The quest for "why" is not useless, but it does require more time and effort than just contemplating "why" for a few minutes. So I recommend Dr. Wilson's new book, but only in the context of other psychological knowledge and approaches.

Combining a variety of studies and experiments, Timothy Wilson has written a fun, challenging, and intelligent book about the connections between our unconscious and our conscious minds. Avoiding old dualisms, showing why Freudian psycholanalysis is a dead-end, Wilson shows how little we understand ourselves, and what we can do to gain more knowledge.
Wilson writes engaging prose, with no jargon; but he presents ideas that intrigueing and exciting. Using many studies and experiments, this book makes the reader think about why we do what we do: the answers are not always comforting, but always important.
This is a terrific book.