|
|
|
Évaluation du client type
Partagez votre opinion avec les autres clients
|
|
|
Le commentaire favorable le plus utile
Le commentaire critique le plus utile
6 internautes sur 6 ont trouvé ce commentaire utile :
I'm a Cognitive Neuroscientist and...
...I think Ramachandran is the most brilliant, creative Neuroscientist in the field. Sure, he is very popular, along with many other science writers. But if you aren't paying attention, you might not see that he is to our field what Mozart, Picasso, and Einstein were to theirs. And this book is both a masterpiece and a magnum opus. Here are some reasons to be so keen...
Publié le Mars 22 2002 par David H. Peterzell
|
› Voir plus de commentaires 5 étoiles, 4 étoiles |
 |
|
Good, not really deep nor unified.
This is a good popular neurology book, that much is true. But it is not unifed, and it is not very deep. What I mean is that the authors do not present a clear theory of brain function, nor a clear way to bridge the gap of phenomenology and neurology. It also does not talk of very important issues, and concentrates on those in which Ramachandran has worked. This is not...
Publié le Avril 5 2002 par Carlos Camara
|
› Voir plus de commentaires 3 étoiles, 2 étoiles, 1 étoiles |
|
|
Educational fun for everyone!, Mai 10 2008
An excellent introduction to the fascinating field of neuropsychology. Dr. Ramachandran has here hand-picked the most interesting of his case studies, and the result is a very interesting book. Even if you have no knowledge of the brain, Ramachandran writes fluently in a language that entertains, informs, and fascinates even the least academic of readers. His writing is easy to follow and unhindered by too many technical terms, as compared to another popular neurologist/author, Oliver Sacks, whose work is less accessible to those unfamiliar with brain physiology. He offers his (very detailed and well-researched) theories and explanations for a number of neurological disorders and everyday experiences, complete with incredibly helpful endnotes for those curious to learn more. I recommend this book to psychology students, science nuts, philosophers, and laypersons alike.
Aidez d'autres clients à trouver les commentaires les plus utiles
Ce commentaire vous a-t-il été utile ?
 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fascinating insight into neurological problems, Avril 18 2004
I first heard of VS Ramachandran when quite by accident I tuned into his giving the 2003 Reith Lectures on BBC Radio 4 (like PBS). His entertaining & instructive style prompted me to tune in a few nights later for the next instalment, and then to go and seek out his published work. Phantoms in the Brain is an excellent introduction to practical studies of phantom limbs syndrome, and thus into the workings of the human brain and the concept of body imaging. As a direct consequence of reading this book, I then eagerly awaited his next offering, the transcript of those BBC Lectures.
Aidez d'autres clients à trouver les commentaires les plus utiles
Ce commentaire vous a-t-il été utile ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
What is the mind-body relationship?, Aoû 12 2002
V.S. Ramachandran ["Rama"] and Sandra Blakeslee make an earnest, plain language attempt to explain clinical research in mind-body situations. In general, they succeed well, although going to extremes in their efforts. The issue is the brain's response to many forms of trauma. Why do amputees, even people born without complete limbs, sense the presence of missing organs? Why do many patients suffering from stroke-induced paralysis insist they are still fully capable of performing physical acts? Why do so many people insist they've had a "religious experience" in the face of all logic? Rama has pursued these questions for many
years and offers us a comprehensive review of his findings and his explanations for these phenomena. It is easy to see from this book why so many people seek Rama's counsel when suffering from neurological disorder. His unpretensious style, abstaining from complex technology when simpler forms of therapy are at hand, his undogmatic approach obviously grant him a superb "bedside manner." He is evidently not above abandoning traditional techniques or philosophies in approaching medical problems. His openly confessed desire to unravel mysteries that have eluded other researchers gives him an edge in arriving at solutions, no matter how bizarre the solutions appear. The resulting narrative is fresh and stimulating for all readers. Rama's many cases presented here demonstrate how much more flexible the brain is than has been conceded by most other researchers. If adult brains can "remap" sensory paths in the face of devastating phsysical injury, then many ideas about the evolutionary development of the human intellect must be reconsidered. Rama, unlike most of his colleagues, is willing to examine the evolutionary roots of the mind in assessing his findings. He accepts a strong genetic basis for our cognitive skills, still aknowledging the impact of conditioning. It's a middle-of-the-road stance, somewhat marred by his unwarrented assault on evolutionary psychology. One can only wish that he'd also cited some of the recent research on the Hox genes which lay down the rules for body formation. If the Hox genes map arms, legs and ears, there is likely some impact on how the brain maps the body, as well. Rama ignores this situation, an amazing omission given his neurological foundation. His more serious stumbles occur in his attempts to equate neurological phenomena with philosophical ramifications of his work. His addressing of cognitive science issues tends to erode much of his presentation. In reflecting how the brain deals with physiological subjects, he reverts to discredited traditional terms in dealing with areas he hasn't fully resolved. He finds "robots" in the mind which act as "alter egos" and unconsciously direct the brain's responses to unusual physical conditions. Rather than confess to ignorance of how these unexplained operations occur, he finds it more compelling to fall back on the "zombie" interpretation, which has no validity. He compounds this misdirection in his concluding chapter ["Do Martians See Red?"] with outmoded references to "qualia." In short, "qualia" is a term applied to undefinable, but commonly accepted personal perceptions of the world around us - "red"or "taste" or "centres of gravity." We all think we can define these manifestations, but on closer inspection, we realize these are indefinable. We think we know what they are, but they elude fixation. For Ramachandran to persist in touting "qualia" as a meaningful term is a surprising lapse in an otherwise excellent book. There's a wealth of information in this book, eloquently presented, but the value here is in the research. His interpretations should be viewed with suspicion.
Aidez d'autres clients à trouver les commentaires les plus utiles
Ce commentaire vous a-t-il été utile ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
stimulating, Janv. 29 2002
"What we call rational grounds for our beliefs are often extremely irrational attempts to justify our instincts. "
Thomas HuxleyVS Ramachandran shot to prominence with his explanation for the "phantom limb syndrome" (which occurs when people continue to vividly experience the amputated part of their body). VSR found that the experience of the phantom limb arises because the brain area which normally controls the (now amputated) limb gets invaded by neurons from neighbouring regions of the brain. Thus when the region formerly devoted to sensing the arm is invaded by neighbouring neurons which respond to face stimulation, the amputee feels his arm when he is stroked across the face. A striking example of such remapping was found in a man who experiences during sexual intercourse the orgasms in his phantom foot - since genitals are in the brain's body map right next to the foot, the nerve cells from the genital area take over the region formerly occupied by the "foot neurons" resulting in migration of the orgasm into the phantom foot. This makes one wonder about the basis of foot fetishes in normal people.... There are many intriguing chapters on blindsight, the concept of "self" and the issue of qualia, so beloved of neurophilosphers. Where the book is at its strongest, however, is when R. draws directly on his clinical experience. He tells scores of amazing stories of patients with symptoms and syndromes which affected their perception, conceptualization, self-awareness and self-knowledge. This book succesfully shows us that conscious mind is simply a thin facade for the (mostly unconscious "self") - that there is a huge gray space between seeing and knowing, of which we are completely unaware. One especially intriguing issue is that of religious experience. It has been long known that people with temporal lobe epilepsy often "find God". Temporal lobes of the brain are the interface between perception and action and what strikes R. is the closeness between emotional centers of the brain (such as the amygdala), centers devoted to memory (the hippocampus) and sensory areas of the temporal cortex. An epileptic fit might "kindle" - reinforce - connections between these brain areas so that communication between them would be increased and people would experience all events (as well as themselves) as imbued with deep significance. Everything in the universe would be seen as conscious and be "carried by a universal tide to the shores of Nirvana". In contrast, a patient with Cotard's syndrome feels so emotionally remote from the world that he will actually make the absurd claim that he is dead or that he can smell his flesh rotting. What this book provides us with, therefore, is an intimate peek into how fragile our reality constructs are and how grateful we should be to these few pounds of gelatinous flesh for the constant reality checks (and un-checks) that they provide us with. There are other fine popular books by prominent brain scientists(Damasio, Churchland, LeDoux and Crick come to mind). I think Ramachandran surpasses them all with his extraordinary experimental ingenuity and curiosity which drive him far away from the ivory tower of clinical science and all the way down to the greener pastures inhabited by psychoanalysis and religion.
Whatever she did, Sandra Blakeslee did an excellent job in making the book readable and enjoyable
Aidez d'autres clients à trouver les commentaires les plus utiles
Ce commentaire vous a-t-il été utile ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
l'uomo che scambiò i suoi piedi per un pene, Oct. 14 1999
sì , questa è una delle affermazioni più interessanti contenute in questo libro, che riprende alcuni dei casi già esposti nel famoso libro di sacks.la descrizione dell'omuncolo e delle zone somatosensariali del cervello ci permettono di conoscere meglio certe sensazioni.chi vuole scrivermi per commentare il libro può farlo
Aidez d'autres clients à trouver les commentaires les plus utiles
Ce commentaire vous a-t-il été utile ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Simple questions with stunning ramifications...., Oct. 2 1999
Par Un client
Perhaps the most intriuging aspect about Dr. Ramachandran's book is the sheer simplicity with which he asks his questions, and the basic nature of his studies with his patients. Even more impressive is how he begins to demonstrate how mind and matter may indeed be connected. This is definitely an excellent book to intoduce yourself to age-old philosophical questions in today's modern, technologically sophisticated world.
Aidez d'autres clients à trouver les commentaires les plus utiles
Ce commentaire vous a-t-il été utile ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
A good read for the novice, Mai 4 1999
Par Un client
A light and breezy account of some of the oddities of neurology, much in the spirit of Oliver Sacks (who also wrote the introduction). Much of the book is devoted to cases of people exhibiting odd behavior after losing part of their brain. This is familiar stuff to any serious student of the brain but will delight and amuse the lay reader unfamiliar with this literature. In addition, the authors offer their thoughts on some of the more contentious issues in many of the fields they touch upon, such as the validity of evolutionary psychology, the limits of adaptationism in evolutionary thought, and the nature of qualia in relation to brain function, to name a few. Furthermore, Ramachandran puts forth some interesting ideas of his own. He refers to the temporal lobe regions involved in complex shape analyses and object recognition as a distinct system or "pathway," which he calls the "what" pathway of vision, endowed with memory and consciousness, while the visual processing areas in the parietal lobe concerned with motion detection and 3-D mapping in space are lumped together as the "where" pathway, which has neither memory nor consciousness. Not being shy, the authors also proceed to emunerate the qualities of qualia, the 3 ingredients of consciousness and other riddles that have puzzled philosophers for centuries. Given the empirical evidence from brain research that supports their views (much of which unfortunately they do not discuss in detail, for brevity's sake), they offer more true insight into these issues than the mountains of philosophical dross these issues have generated in times both ancient and modern. Ramachandran may not be right, but he shows that a little empirical, scientific knowledge proves far more useful than a lot of groundless speculation by armchair experts. A good read for both novice and professional.
Aidez d'autres clients à trouver les commentaires les plus utiles
Ce commentaire vous a-t-il été utile ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Engrossing and entertaining reading, Janv. 12 1999
Par Un client
Ramachandran's ability to captivate is partly due to his sense of humour, which in itself is a welcome change from the numbing factual recitations plaguing books about the brain. But the primary reason why the book is hard to put down is the investigative approach. Each chapter explores some fundamentally challenging behaviour of the brain, and since each of us require this information to a greater or lesser extent, the unravelling of the sometimes surreal situations and their resolution by simple experiments of logic is fascinating. Ramachandran uses very little other than an ingenious approach, and whether all of the basic experiments are solely his or not is irrelevant, since they are only the building blocks on which he bases his deductions. It could do with some colour illustrations, but it doesn't pretend to be that sort of a book. It's a good read, so just go and buy it!
Aidez d'autres clients à trouver les commentaires les plus utiles
Ce commentaire vous a-t-il été utile ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
An engaging read for students and neophytes alike., Déc 17 1998
Par Un client
This is easily one of the best non-fiction books I've read in the past year. I am a student of psychology, with an emphasis on both neuroscience and cognitive science, and I can say that this book should be very interesting for both the layman and professional alike. The author's style is very easy to read, and he provides just the right amount of technical information to inform the non-scientist and yet not bore those who are well-educated in the fields he discusses. I highly recommend this book to anyone even remotely interested in the way the mind works (pretty much anyone who's got one, that is).
Aidez d'autres clients à trouver les commentaires les plus utiles
Ce commentaire vous a-t-il été utile ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ce produit
|
|
CDN$ 17.25 CDN$ 12.59
En stock
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
| |
Les clients qui ont vu cet article ont aussi vu
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Accueil Amazon
