Reviews from Amazon

Reviews elsewhere on the web:

independent.co.uk

Steven Pinker

The Stuff of Thought

The relationship between language and thought is a topic which has generated a considerable amount of argument. In The Stuff of Thought: Language as a Window into Human Nature Steven Pinker shows that a deep look at the ins and outs of language can move us away from empty philosophising and give some valuable insights into the workings of our minds.

The book starts by looking at the subtle differences in grammar based upon the things talked about. For instance we can load or throw hay into a wagon, but we can't throw a wagon with hay. Pinker goes on to examine the various theories people have had on the nature of thought - is the mind a 'blank slate' or do we come preprogrammed with huge numbers of concepts. He then looks at how we use the concepts of space and time in our language, which brings the reader on to a chapter on metaphors, and how their metaphorical nature is forgotten over time. The chapter 'What's in a name' looks at how words and names can vary in popularity, and at how new words can arise - but they're usually not the ones on the lists of 'This year's new words'. This is followed by a chapter on the sort of language by which we might express our thoughts directly - obscenities and the like. Pinker then looks at how our culture affects the way we say things, for example in the use of euphemisms.

In his treatment of a philosophical topic, Pinker seems to have caught a bit of the philosophers disease - the chapters are pretty long and some readers might struggle to get through this book. Also, I would have liked more of a summary at the end of what the book has told us about the nature of thought. But if you're the sort of person who likes finding out lots of details about the peculiarities of language then I would think that this is a book for you.

Amazon.com info

Paperback 512 pages
ISBN: 0143114247
Salesrank: 42211
Weight:0.95 lbs

Published: 2008 Penguin (Non-Classics)

Amazon price $10.88

Marketplace:New from $6.50:Used from $2.44

Buy from Amazon.com

Amazon.co.uk info

Hardcover 512 pages
ISBN: 0713997419
Salesrank: 177895
Weight:2.03 lbs

Published: 2007 Allen Lane

Marketplace:New from £9.88:Used from £4.70

Buy from Amazon.co.uk

Amazon.ca info

Paperback 512 pages
ISBN: 0143114247
Salesrank: 65530
Weight:0.95 lbs

Published: 2008 Penguin Paperbacks

Amazon price CDN$ 12.78

Marketplace:New from CDN$ 8.28:Used from CDN$ 8.46

Buy from Amazon.ca

Product Description
*This New York Times* bestseller is an exciting and fearless investigation of language** Bestselling author Steven Pinker possesses that rare combination of scientific aptitude and verbal eloquence that enables him to provide lucid explanations of deep and powerful ideas. His previous books—including the Pulitzer Prize finalist The Blank Slate—have catapulted him into the limelight as one of today’s most important popular science writers. In The Stuff of Thought, Pinker presents a fascinating look at how our words explain our nature. Considering scientific questions with examples from everyday life, The Stuff of Thought is a brilliantly crafted and highly readable work that will appeal to fans of everything from The Selfish Gene and Blink to Eats, Shoots & Leaves.

Product Description

This New York Times bestseller is an exciting and fearless investigation of language

Bestselling author Steven Pinker possesses that rare combination of scientific aptitude and verbal eloquence that enables him to provide lucid explanations of deep and powerful ideas. His previous books—including the Pulitzer Prize finalist The Blank Slate—have catapulted him into the limelight as one of today’s most important popular science writers. In The Stuff of Thought, Pinker presents a fascinating look at how our words explain our nature. Considering scientific questions with examples from everyday life, The Stuff of Thought is a brilliantly crafted and highly readable work that will appeal to fans of everything from The Selfish Gene and Blink to Eats, Shoots & Leaves.

Linguistics - cheaper than a brainscan for a window in to how our mind works ***
Stephen Pinker's recent foray in to the world of language is not for everyone. The topic doesn't so deeply tackle our cherished notions of self like The Blank Slate and doesn't appeal to a wide audience but it does offer a window in to what it means to be human. One of my least favorite topics in school was grammar and I will admit I found some of the sentence, verb and adjective deconstruction a bit tedious at first. But once I delved further in to the book, I began to appreciate the linguistic deconstructions and I find myself analyzing words and sentence structure for fun. The author makes connections with the way we phrase sentences and the way we use grammar to try and uncover a universal way that humans visualize the world. He claims that the way we speak about the world is not a historical accident but is a demonstration of the way our mind works. The findings that he uncovers are interesting but not earth-shattering. Deciphering how we mix metaphors of physical objects with knowledge. when we 'gather information' as if information were seashells plucked from the beach is an example of a topic dissected in the book. The study of linguistics that the author provides offers a unique look in to our neurology that is much less costly and invasive than brain scans and dissections. Additionally, this book will give you a much greater appreciation for the development of language in humans and for the evolution of how we think about the world.

Linguistics - cheaper than a brainscan for a window in to how our mind works ***

Stephen Pinker's recent foray in to the world of language is not for everyone. The topic doesn't so deeply tackle our cherished notions of self like The Blank Slate and doesn't appeal to a wide audience but it does offer a window in to what it means to be human. One of my least favorite topics in school was grammar and I will admit I found some of the sentence, verb and adjective deconstruction a bit tedious at first. But once I delved further in to the book, I began to appreciate the linguistic deconstructions and I find myself analyzing words and sentence structure for fun. The author makes connections with the way we phrase sentences and the way we use grammar to try and uncover a universal way that humans visualize the world. He claims that the way we speak about the world is not a historical accident but is a demonstration of the way our mind works. The findings that he uncovers are interesting but not earth-shattering. Deciphering how we mix metaphors of physical objects with knowledge. when we 'gather information' as if information were seashells plucked from the beach is an example of a topic dissected in the book. The study of linguistics that the author provides offers a unique look in to our neurology that is much less costly and invasive than brain scans and dissections. Additionally, this book will give you a much greater appreciation for the development of language in humans and for the evolution of how we think about the world.

Illusion and reality *
In this book, Steven Pinker sinks into the morass of linguistics (language games), which is the equivalent of cleaning one's spectacles, as one great philosopher said. Kant, Tarski His book is partly based on Kant, his a priori knowledge (space, time, causality) and the impossibility of knowing `the thing in itself'. This a priori knowledge is not a priori valid (K. Popper) and has been buried by quantum mechanics (W. Heisenberg). On the other hand, Schopenhauer remarked astutely that we can know `the thing in itself', because we know our own body (see Bryan Magee). He uncovered `the will', the all important struggle for life. Alfred Tarski's distinction between language (facts) and meta-language (evaluation of facts) is not even mentioned. Space, time, newspeak Space and time are not continuous, but discrete (Lee Smolin). Steven Pinker discusses seriously `newspeak', the ambiguous language of corrupt politicians who are trying to hide their real agenda (Thomas Frank). This book is a huge disappointment. However, I recommend highly the evolutionary part of S. Pinker's `How the Mind works'.

Illusion and reality *

In this book, Steven Pinker sinks into the morass of linguistics (language games), which is the equivalent of cleaning one's spectacles, as one great philosopher said.

Kant, Tarski
His book is partly based on Kant, his a priori knowledge (space, time, causality) and the impossibility of knowing `the thing in itself'. This a priori knowledge is not a priori valid (K. Popper) and has been buried by quantum mechanics (W. Heisenberg). On the other hand, Schopenhauer remarked astutely that we can know `the thing in itself', because we know our own body (see Bryan Magee). He uncovered `the will', the all important struggle for life.
Alfred Tarski's distinction between language (facts) and meta-language (evaluation of facts) is not even mentioned.

Space, time, newspeak
Space and time are not continuous, but discrete (Lee Smolin).
Steven Pinker discusses seriously `newspeak', the ambiguous language of corrupt politicians who are trying to hide their real agenda (Thomas Frank).

This book is a huge disappointment.
However, I recommend highly the evolutionary part of S. Pinker's `How the Mind works'.

Meh - read it for pleasure not for information ***
I have to say that I am not pleased at all with Steven Pinker's "The Stuff of Thought." It reads, and seems written, like a how a journalist interested in a thousand topics slaps together a general review book of those thousand topics with an almost-forgotten common theme - in Pinker's case, that common theme is apparently "Stuff". Don't get me wrong, his other books were better written with much better focus. Still, in reading this book, I find it very difficult to get past the lack of depth and the lack of any thought placed into the chapters and sections. First off, he is too obsessed with fecal matter and swear words. It seems like every section has a reference to taboo words. Listen, if you enjoy discussing those topics, then write a book about those topics, simple as that. Why waste your time and your reader's time with filler topics. But okay, fine, it's not a great burden for me (and maybe you) to just keep reading those references over and over until you reach that blasted chapter. My biggest issue with the book, though, is his section on count-mass nouns in the "Cleaving the Air" chapter. I know that he says, and the reviews state, that he wrote this for a general audience. And perhaps a general audience never thought too much about count and mass nouns - though I would like to think that we all have wondered about them before, perhaps more than Pinker cares to admit. I am glad that he references important works in count-mass studies, such as the Barner and Snedeker (2005) work; but sadly, perhaps due to the number of topics that he has to cover (or maybe something else?) he completely avoids/misses the more recent arguments. Yes, great, he talked about the universal grinder (which can turn any count noun into a mass noun - even TV Mr. Pinker, even TV). And yes, he talked about classifiers and counters that are used to enable English speakers to count mass nouns like water. But, more recently, studies have been showing a lot less black and white in the whole mass-count distinction. In fact, some mass nouns can act like count nouns without the use of classifiers/counters - furniture is the best example, and then maybe Candle Light - while other mass nouns cannot be counted - for instance, water or tea. Also, in languages that appear to have all mass nouns (Japanese for instance) speakers can actually count mass nouns without using classifiers. Moreover, Japanese arguably also has count nouns - depending on if you divide the nouns into count/mass or countable-mass/non-countable-mass - that are distinguished by the use of certain classifiers. Since Pinker focuses more on English, I am not surprised that he does not reference Japanese studies; yet it is unfortunate that Pinker does not even mention countable mass nouns because he even mentions the paper that shows evidence that mass nouns count: Barner and Snedeker (2005). It may seem like I'm picking nits - yet this is just one example of many that makes me wonder if Steven Pinker really put much thought into writing, organizing, and arguing the ideas in this book. One other example is his arguments against Linguistic Determinism. Fine, okay, Mr. Pinker - you win with those 'insightful' arguments against Linguistic Determinism. Sadly, though, you don't win very much since the last time I heard, Weak RELATIVISM was more popular and more explainable than STRONG theories of relativism (which would be determinism for Pinker). If he wants to explain to his audience why his theory is better and why other theories fail, then I wish he would have actually argued against more pertinent and harder-to-strike-down theories. In my opinion, this is a wake attempt to prove his point. All in all, if you thoroughly enjoy Pinker and can't get enough of him, and if you can get through the writing and the really bad layouts (I'm referencing word charts in the beginning and end chapters), and you care to look up some of his references for more information, then this book might be a good read for you. If, however, you are on the fence about Pinker and would rather not read a book lacking depth, then this book might not be for you. Personally, I would go through the chapters, see what interests me and then pick up the books in that he references in the back of the book.

Meh - read it for pleasure not for information ***

I have to say that I am not pleased at all with Steven Pinker's "The Stuff of Thought." It reads, and seems written, like a how a journalist interested in a thousand topics slaps together a general review book of those thousand topics with an almost-forgotten common theme - in Pinker's case, that common theme is apparently "Stuff". Don't get me wrong, his other books were better written with much better focus.

Still, in reading this book, I find it very difficult to get past the lack of depth and the lack of any thought placed into the chapters and sections.

First off, he is too obsessed with fecal matter and swear words. It seems like every section has a reference to taboo words. Listen, if you enjoy discussing those topics, then write a book about those topics, simple as that. Why waste your time and your reader's time with filler topics. But okay, fine, it's not a great burden for me (and maybe you) to just keep reading those references over and over until you reach that blasted chapter.

My biggest issue with the book, though, is his section on count-mass nouns in the "Cleaving the Air" chapter. I know that he says, and the reviews state, that he wrote this for a general audience. And perhaps a general audience never thought too much about count and mass nouns - though I would like to think that we all have wondered about them before, perhaps more than Pinker cares to admit. I am glad that he references important works in count-mass studies, such as the Barner and Snedeker (2005) work; but sadly, perhaps due to the number of topics that he has to cover (or maybe something else?) he completely avoids/misses the more recent arguments. Yes, great, he talked about the universal grinder (which can turn any count noun into a mass noun - even TV Mr. Pinker, even TV).

And yes, he talked about classifiers and counters that are used to enable English speakers to count mass nouns like water. But, more recently, studies have been showing a lot less black and white in the whole mass-count distinction. In fact, some mass nouns can act like count nouns without the use of classifiers/counters - furniture is the best example, and then maybe Candle Light - while other mass nouns cannot be counted - for instance, water or tea.

Also, in languages that appear to have all mass nouns (Japanese for instance) speakers can actually count mass nouns without using classifiers. Moreover, Japanese arguably also has count nouns - depending on if you divide the nouns into count/mass or countable-mass/non-countable-mass - that are distinguished by the use of certain classifiers.

Since Pinker focuses more on English, I am not surprised that he does not reference Japanese studies; yet it is unfortunate that Pinker does not even mention countable mass nouns because he even mentions the paper that shows evidence that mass nouns count: Barner and Snedeker (2005).

It may seem like I'm picking nits - yet this is just one example of many that makes me wonder if Steven Pinker really put much thought into writing, organizing, and arguing the ideas in this book. One other example is his arguments against Linguistic Determinism. Fine, okay, Mr. Pinker - you win with those 'insightful' arguments against Linguistic Determinism. Sadly, though, you don't win very much since the last time I heard, Weak RELATIVISM was more popular and more explainable than STRONG theories of relativism (which would be determinism for Pinker). If he wants to explain to his audience why his theory is better and why other theories fail, then I wish he would have actually argued against more pertinent and harder-to-strike-down theories. In my opinion, this is a wake attempt to prove his point.

All in all, if you thoroughly enjoy Pinker and can't get enough of him, and if you can get through the writing and the really bad layouts (I'm referencing word charts in the beginning and end chapters), and you care to look up some of his references for more information, then this book might be a good read for you.

If, however, you are on the fence about Pinker and would rather not read a book lacking depth, then this book might not be for you. Personally, I would go through the chapters, see what interests me and then pick up the books in that he references in the back of the book.

a 1 star book for sure! *
Every now and then a book with an average rating of 4 stars gets few readers who think it really doesn't deserve more than a single star. Sometimes those few readers are right! This book is a good example. Few good ideas lost in an ocean of terrible writing..

a 1 star book for sure! *

Every now and then a book with an average rating of 4 stars gets few readers who think it really doesn't deserve more than a single star. Sometimes those few readers are right! This book is a good example. Few good ideas lost in an ocean of terrible writing..

Setting Science Back Again *
It is really sad our culture continues to reinforce superstitious ignorance. It is so sad our culture continues to reinforce what is popular and rejects science it doesn't understand. B.F. Skinner actually did scientific research and understood the brain functions based on the contingencies of reinforcement. Language is human behavior and functions through real world variables, not made up mentalistic causes as Steven Pinker makes up. B.F. Skinner wrote Verbal Behavior which actually provides people the tools to effectively improve language skills. Verbal Behavior actually explains slang, grammatical inconsitencies, pauses, etc... Steven Pinker can't explain a thing, but sounds good. He gives a mentalistic account from the dark ages. Pinker tells us we reason what we say. He never explains where reason comes from. He just uses creationist logic of never explaining the self-initiating force we all possess that causes us to speak and calls it science. Just call your superstitious ignorance sicence, speak authoritatively, add some good humor and you reinforce cultural ignorance and set science back to the time of Kant before science existed. Actual scientists like B.F. Skinner will be ignored. It is scary B.F. Skinner explain this ignorant behavior and it is unstoppable, but sadly it leads to disastrous consequences by telling people to fry and egg by thinking REALLY hard about it. Scary. Please someone laugh At Steven Pinker for calling behaviorism stimulus response psychology when it gives 6 causes for human behavior, all more complicated then stimulus response, and read Verbal Behavior and recognize it as a true work of science. [...].

Setting Science Back Again *

It is really sad our culture continues to reinforce superstitious ignorance. It is so sad our culture continues to reinforce what is popular and rejects science it doesn't understand. B.F. Skinner actually did scientific research and understood the brain functions based on the contingencies of reinforcement. Language is human behavior and functions through real world variables, not made up mentalistic causes as Steven Pinker makes up.

B.F. Skinner wrote Verbal Behavior which actually provides people the tools to effectively improve language skills. Verbal Behavior actually explains slang, grammatical inconsitencies, pauses, etc... Steven Pinker can't explain a thing, but sounds good. He gives a mentalistic account from the dark ages. Pinker tells us we reason what we say. He never explains where reason comes from. He just uses creationist logic of never explaining the self-initiating force we all possess that causes us to speak and calls it science. Just call your superstitious ignorance sicence, speak authoritatively, add some good humor and you reinforce cultural ignorance and set science back to the time of Kant before science existed. Actual scientists like B.F. Skinner will be ignored.

It is scary B.F. Skinner explain this ignorant behavior and it is unstoppable, but sadly it leads to disastrous consequences by telling people to fry and egg by thinking REALLY hard about it. Scary. Please someone laugh At Steven Pinker for calling behaviorism stimulus response psychology when it gives 6 causes for human behavior, all more complicated then stimulus response, and read Verbal Behavior and recognize it as a true work of science.
[...].

Theoretical discussion of language *****
Steven Pinker's enthusiasm about language comes through everywhere in this book - which is a good thing, because the subject matter itself is dense and complex. This combination results in a curious reading experience: Pinker's lively style, many anecdotes and extreme lucidity pull you forward in the text, but the difficulty of the questions he raises could stump you for some time. He explores many linguistic theories in such depth that readers without a particular interest in the field may, frankly, get lost or find the book too abstract, despite Pinker's numerous attempts to ground his discussions in reality. Therefore, while this is a fine book, getAbstract recommends it primarily to patient readers who have a strong interest in language and philosophy. Bring along an open mind and a sense of humor, since Pinker explores language practices - such as obscenities and insults - that may provoke emotional responses.

Theoretical discussion of language *****

Steven Pinker's enthusiasm about language comes through everywhere in this book - which is a good thing, because the subject matter itself is dense and complex. This combination results in a curious reading experience: Pinker's lively style, many anecdotes and extreme lucidity pull you forward in the text, but the difficulty of the questions he raises could stump you for some time. He explores many linguistic theories in such depth that readers without a particular interest in the field may, frankly, get lost or find the book too abstract, despite Pinker's numerous attempts to ground his discussions in reality. Therefore, while this is a fine book, getAbstract recommends it primarily to patient readers who have a strong interest in language and philosophy. Bring along an open mind and a sense of humor, since Pinker explores language practices - such as obscenities and insults - that may provoke emotional responses.

Great stuff! *****
Steven Pinker was already one of my favourite authors before this book propelled him into another league. Suddenly, a highly-respected academic and broadsheet media darling had declared to the world that metaphors matter! In Pinker's view, metaphors are a key aspect of 'the stuff of thought', the actual material of which thoughts are made. For anyone with an interest in the impact of language on thought, thought on language, this book is mind-expanding. Wittily presented, and yet backed by solid research, here are the details of essential human cognitive processes and patterns. Every page is packed with information and ideas, which can make the book feel rather dense in places. But skim the heavy stuff and press on - this one is worth the effort. And the very best bit? The book includes a reference to Clean Language: Revealing Metaphors and Opening Minds :-)

Great stuff! *****

Steven Pinker was already one of my favourite authors before this book propelled him into another league. Suddenly, a highly-respected academic and broadsheet media darling had declared to the world that metaphors matter! In Pinker's view, metaphors are a key aspect of 'the stuff of thought', the actual material of which thoughts are made.

For anyone with an interest in the impact of language on thought, thought on language, this book is mind-expanding. Wittily presented, and yet backed by solid research, here are the details of essential human cognitive processes and patterns. Every page is packed with information and ideas, which can make the book feel rather dense in places. But skim the heavy stuff and press on - this one is worth the effort.

And the very best bit? The book includes a reference to Clean Language: Revealing Metaphors and Opening Minds :-)

A Magnificently Mind-Enriching Tour-de-Force *****
This is a truly remarkable book. Pinker has a way of making a reader think simply about complex concepts, using a writing style that is entertaining and stimulating in itself, as well as perfectly precise. This is one of those books which can definitely change a reader's life, making it necessary to perceive life, language and social interaction in a wholly different way. At times, following the thread takes some concentration, particularly when the technical terminology of linguistic concepts must be held in memory, but this effort is always rewarding. Pinker leads us through a mind-expanding, multi-dimensional space, exploring the many relationships of language to thought and exercising those parts of the mind that we normally allow to perform routine assessments. It's possible that, after you read this book, your routine will be subtly changed and enriched, and this notion adds to the pleasure of its reading. A wonderful book!

A Magnificently Mind-Enriching Tour-de-Force *****

This is a truly remarkable book. Pinker has a way of making a reader think simply about complex concepts, using a writing style that is entertaining and stimulating in itself, as well as perfectly precise. This is one of those books which can definitely change a reader's life, making it necessary to perceive life, language and social interaction in a wholly different way. At times, following the thread takes some concentration, particularly when the technical terminology of linguistic concepts must be held in memory, but this effort is always rewarding. Pinker leads us through a mind-expanding, multi-dimensional space, exploring the many relationships of language to thought and exercising those parts of the mind that we normally allow to perform routine assessments. It's possible that, after you read this book, your routine will be subtly changed and enriched, and this notion adds to the pleasure of its reading. A wonderful book!

There still is a Deep Structure *****
Pinker knows how to connect with his readers and deliver complex ideas painlessly. Those who gave up on deep knowledge of human meaning via linguistic structure should ponder this book. Those who wonder what all the cognitive scientists are fighting about will be enlightened with a four way contrast explained in chapter 3 between (1)Pinker's framework (2) Fodor's Extreme Nativism in which word meanings are inviolable (3) Radical Pragmatists, who think word meaning can't be pinned down, and (4)Linguistic Determinists, who think we can only think what our language allows us to. Maybe you will feel like they know enough now to take sides and join the free-for-all. Or maybe we are actually getting to a place where some consensus can begin to emerge. But there is plenty more to explain. For example: I don't think his focus on the centrality of verbs explains the centrality of the Subject-Predicate connection.

There still is a Deep Structure *****

Pinker knows how to connect with his readers and deliver complex ideas painlessly. Those who gave up on deep knowledge of human meaning via linguistic structure should ponder this book. Those who wonder what all the cognitive scientists are fighting about will be enlightened with a four way contrast explained in chapter 3 between (1)Pinker's framework (2) Fodor's Extreme Nativism in which word meanings are inviolable (3) Radical Pragmatists, who think word meaning can't be pinned down, and (4)Linguistic Determinists, who think we can only think what our language allows us to. Maybe you will feel like they know enough now to take sides and join the free-for-all. Or maybe we are actually getting to a place where some consensus can begin to emerge. But there is plenty more to explain. For example: I don't think his focus on the centrality of verbs explains the centrality of the Subject-Predicate connection.

Unitnentionally ironic? ***
While it has interesting moments, I found that this book was unintentionally ironic. Namely, Pinker is famous for supporting the idea that people aren't good at "grade-school grammar", with split-infinities, present possible, and future-whatevers-whatever. We're good at using language intuitively. So in pursuit of that statement, he goes ahead and writes a book that is FULL of grade-school grammar references. If you're not a student of language or linguistics, this is going to be sloooooow and painful! The first half of the book was especially dense. Besides being obtuse, the pacing is off, with too much pontificating and too little evidence and implications. I really had to force myself to read pages 50-200. After that, the book gets a little better as it starts considering more specific uses of language (e.g., metaphors, cursing, etiquette, etc.). This section brings in more psychology, and I found it to be much more satisfying to read. Still, the same problems of technical terms and too many examples leave it a little hollow. I honestly think that this book would have been better at half its length, maybe even less. So as an evolutionary psychology, psychology, or linguistics book aimed at the general public, this book falls flat. There's some interesting bits of knowledge in here, but you have to do a lot of sifting to get to them. Again, I find it really ironic that a man who ought to know as well as anyone how intuitive we are with language still chose to wrote a book largely devoted to explaining simple phenomena with needlessly obtuse definitions, examples, and minutia. I've attended a couple of Pinker's talks, including a more recent on this book. I don't know if it's a coincidence, but I remember tuning out for minutes 10-30 of a one-hour talk, which is just about what I did for this book. So if you're: 1- A fast reader 2- A patient reader and/or 3- Highly familiar with linguistics Then this book might be for you. Otherwise, I think there's better books out there for psychology, evolutionary psychology, or linguistics.

Unitnentionally ironic? ***

While it has interesting moments, I found that this book was unintentionally ironic. Namely, Pinker is famous for supporting the idea that people aren't good at "grade-school grammar", with split-infinities, present possible, and future-whatevers-whatever. We're good at using language intuitively. So in pursuit of that statement, he goes ahead and writes a book that is FULL of grade-school grammar references. If you're not a student of language or linguistics, this is going to be sloooooow and painful!

The first half of the book was especially dense. Besides being obtuse, the pacing is off, with too much pontificating and too little evidence and implications. I really had to force myself to read pages 50-200. After that, the book gets a little better as it starts considering more specific uses of language (e.g., metaphors, cursing, etiquette, etc.). This section brings in more psychology, and I found it to be much more satisfying to read. Still, the same problems of technical terms and too many examples leave it a little hollow. I honestly think that this book would have been better at half its length, maybe even less.

So as an evolutionary psychology, psychology, or linguistics book aimed at the general public, this book falls flat. There's some interesting bits of knowledge in here, but you have to do a lot of sifting to get to them. Again, I find it really ironic that a man who ought to know as well as anyone how intuitive we are with language still chose to wrote a book largely devoted to explaining simple phenomena with needlessly obtuse definitions, examples, and minutia. I've attended a couple of Pinker's talks, including a more recent on this book. I don't know if it's a coincidence, but I remember tuning out for minutes 10-30 of a one-hour talk, which is just about what I did for this book. So if you're:

1- A fast reader
2- A patient reader
and/or 3- Highly familiar with linguistics

Then this book might be for you. Otherwise, I think there's better books out there for psychology, evolutionary psychology, or linguistics.

The Stuff of Thought ***
The Stuff of Thought - Steven Pinker, 2007 The Stuff of Thought ought to be titled The Stuff of Language - a tale told by a linguist full of sound and parsing signifying a fair bit of neat info about language but not a lot spot about the brain. This is because the book leans heavily on linguistics rather than the biological sciences and talks of how language has been taken apart by linguists and what this suggests about how our linguistic minds work. And if that is what you want in a book of this title, written by a well-known, clever, disciple of Chomsky, this is it. Pinker is an engaging, magpie intellectual in that he has an almost endless, tantalizing list of interesting facts, jokes and permutations at his fingertips while ripping through such subjects as: the social purpose of language, the mind as metaphor machine, the relation between language and the 'reality' we share, the relation between words and thinking and emotions, the etymology of words, for example, names, and naming, the symbolism in language, how we say one thing while meaning something quite different, how we use language as a medium of mental exchange, and so on. The last paragraph of Chapter 1, Words and Worlds, is a quick summary of this book. If you are looking for someone to disaggregate language and show what this reveals about humans, this is a good book to buy. On the other hand, at 439 pages (before chapter notes) of medium-sized print, the book is 100 pages too long. I found myself skipping here and there. Read the first and last chapters first. They tell you the entire book in short form, though there is much fun missed, for ex, the Monty Python Spam skit and the chapter on swearing. On the other hand, what I would have been more interested in a book of this title was to hear an update on books by Damasio and Panskepp about the role of the sub-conscious in our thoughts, particularly as we do not think in our emotions in words, an important distinction, because when we think consciously, much of what we do is in words. So that words have a primacy in our conscious thinking, and thus the world that Pinker is talking about, but have zero, zilch, nada, nothing to say about the mid-brain where emotion is situated and sends its tendrils up into our conscious brain behind the right front eyebrow for us to focus our attention on and then be brought to life. I would have liked to hear his take on how Wernicke's (recognition of language) area in our left temporal lobe has a role in recognizing what others are saying to us and our visual understanding of written language (whether in letters or hieroglyphs). I would have liked to hear him address the role of Broca's area (speech) in our being able to communicate with one another through making our lips, tongue, lungs, mental feedback loops and etc. work. And I was interested, as a poet, in his take on metaphor, because that is a primary part of poetry. Here, again, in chapter 5, he breaks metaphor down into different types based on this and that distinction on subject matter, time sequence, spatial separation and so on. All of these are important to the student of language in that person's quest to understand our medium of mental exchange. And how our language is saturated with metaphor to an extent that we don't even recognize that many things we say are metaphors. If someone offers the symbolic ice-breaker: 'Hi, how are you?' And we answer: Feeling up. Feeling down., or, I'm dead. All of those responses are metaphors, as in, to feel good is up, to feel bad is down, and being dead simply conveys how tired we are. All three are metaphors, but trivial ones. I found it fascinating that our speaking is drenched in metaphor. On the other hand, the distinctions, of different metaphor type as parsed in this book is irrelevant to a poet. A poet is interested in producing more, more apt, more original, non-cliche metaphors out of the endless manic creativity that we have in Wernicke's area linked to frontal creativity, influenced by the subterranean currents of the subconscious. But, perhaps this is expecting too much out of this kind of book. dcreid.ca. And, one final thought: the image of the book on this site is not large enough to give you the book's sub-title: Language as a Window into Human Nature. Since the title is: The Stuff of Thought, knowing the sub-title is highly relevant to the slant of the book, and thus who would be interested in buying it.

The Stuff of Thought ***

The Stuff of Thought - Steven Pinker, 2007

The Stuff of Thought ought to be titled The Stuff of Language - a tale told by a linguist full of sound and parsing signifying a fair bit of neat info about language but not a lot spot about the brain. This is because the book leans heavily on linguistics rather than the biological sciences and talks of how language has been taken apart by linguists and what this suggests about how our linguistic minds work. And if that is what you want in a book of this title, written by a well-known, clever, disciple of Chomsky, this is it. Pinker is an engaging, magpie intellectual in that he has an almost endless, tantalizing list of interesting facts, jokes and permutations at his fingertips while ripping through such subjects as: the social purpose of language, the mind as metaphor machine, the relation between language and the 'reality' we share, the relation between words and thinking and emotions, the etymology of words, for example, names, and naming, the symbolism in language, how we say one thing while meaning something quite different, how we use language as a medium of mental exchange, and so on.

The last paragraph of Chapter 1, Words and Worlds, is a quick summary of this book. If you are looking for someone to disaggregate language and show what this reveals about humans, this is a good book to buy. On the other hand, at 439 pages (before chapter notes) of medium-sized print, the book is 100 pages too long. I found myself skipping here and there. Read the first and last chapters first. They tell you the entire book in short form, though there is much fun missed, for ex, the Monty Python Spam skit and the chapter on swearing.

On the other hand, what I would have been more interested in a book of this title was to hear an update on books by Damasio and Panskepp about the role of the sub-conscious in our thoughts, particularly as we do not think in our emotions in words, an important distinction, because when we think consciously, much of what we do is in words. So that words have a primacy in our conscious thinking, and thus the world that Pinker is talking about, but have zero, zilch, nada, nothing to say about the mid-brain where emotion is situated and sends its tendrils up into our conscious brain behind the right front eyebrow for us to focus our attention on and then be brought to life.

I would have liked to hear his take on how Wernicke's (recognition of language) area in our left temporal lobe has a role in recognizing what others are saying to us and our visual understanding of written language (whether in letters or hieroglyphs). I would have liked to hear him address the role of Broca's area (speech) in our being able to communicate with one another through making our lips, tongue, lungs, mental feedback loops and etc. work.

And I was interested, as a poet, in his take on metaphor, because that is a primary part of poetry. Here, again, in chapter 5, he breaks metaphor down into different types based on this and that distinction on subject matter, time sequence, spatial separation and so on. All of these are important to the student of language in that person's quest to understand our medium of mental exchange. And how our language is saturated with metaphor to an extent that we don't even recognize that many things we say are metaphors. If someone offers the symbolic ice-breaker: 'Hi, how are you?' And we answer: Feeling up. Feeling down., or, I'm dead. All of those responses are metaphors, as in, to feel good is up, to feel bad is down, and being dead simply conveys how tired we are. All three are metaphors, but trivial ones.

I found it fascinating that our speaking is drenched in metaphor. On the other hand, the distinctions, of different metaphor type as parsed in this book is irrelevant to a poet. A poet is interested in producing more, more apt, more original, non-cliche metaphors out of the endless manic creativity that we have in Wernicke's area linked to frontal creativity, influenced by the subterranean currents of the subconscious. But, perhaps this is expecting too much out of this kind of book. dcreid.ca.

And, one final thought: the image of the book on this site is not large enough to give you the book's sub-title: Language as a Window into Human Nature. Since the title is: The Stuff of Thought, knowing the sub-title is highly relevant to the slant of the book, and thus who would be interested in buying it.

Phew... a tough row to hoe ****
Pinker pontificates on the particles of ponderment, and it's not always much easier to read than the start of this sentence. I found myself skipping through the denser passages on linguistics and skimmed his more egregious excursions into strawmanderism, but there are plenty of gems here. The chapter on swearing is a scream and I thought he fairly convincing debunked some other theories of the mind (the idea that metaphor is the stuff of thought, for example). Some tantalising glimpses of what our grey matter may be doing up there does come out in Pinker's detailed analysis of language, and this is well worth a read for anyone who's wondered about how it is they wonder.

Phew... a tough row to hoe ****

Pinker pontificates on the particles of ponderment, and it's not always much easier to read than the start of this sentence. I found myself skipping through the denser passages on linguistics and skimmed his more egregious excursions into strawmanderism, but there are plenty of gems here. The chapter on swearing is a scream and I thought he fairly convincing debunked some other theories of the mind (the idea that metaphor is the stuff of thought, for example). Some tantalising glimpses of what our grey matter may be doing up there does come out in Pinker's detailed analysis of language, and this is well worth a read for anyone who's wondered about how it is they wonder.

Not up to his previous books ***
Although there are many interesting ideas in this book, especially the analysis of what fine-grained grammatical distinctions show about our mechanisms of thought, there is too much speculative philosophy. Steven Pinker has lots of facts about language at his disposal, so these excursions are disappointing - let's have more fact and less speculation next time. Not worth the hardcover price, so you may want to wait for the paperback.

Not up to his previous books ***

Although there are many interesting ideas in this book, especially the analysis of what fine-grained grammatical distinctions show about our mechanisms of thought, there is too much speculative philosophy. Steven Pinker has lots of facts about language at his disposal, so these excursions are disappointing - let's have more fact and less speculation next time.
Not worth the hardcover price, so you may want to wait for the paperback.