The Political Mind et plus d'un million d'autres livres sont disponibles pour le Kindle d'Amazon. En savoir plus
EUR 13,14
  • Tous les prix incluent la TVA.
Il ne reste plus que 14 exemplaire(s) en stock (d'autres exemplaires sont en cours d'acheminement).
Expédié et vendu par Amazon.
Emballage cadeau disponible.
Quantité :1
The Political Mind: A Cog... a été ajouté à votre Panier
Amazon rachète votre
article EUR 3,22 en chèque-cadeau.
Vous l'avez déjà ?
Repliez vers l'arrière Repliez vers l'avant
Ecoutez Lecture en cours... Interrompu   Vous écoutez un extrait de l'édition audio Audible
En savoir plus
Voir les 2 images

The Political Mind: A Cognitive Scientist's Guide to Your Brain and Its Politics (Anglais) Broché – 2 juin 2009


Voir les 7 formats et éditions Masquer les autres formats et éditions
Prix Amazon Neuf à partir de Occasion à partir de
Format Kindle
"Veuillez réessayer"
Relié
"Veuillez réessayer"
EUR 19,74 EUR 2,03
Broché
"Veuillez réessayer"
EUR 13,14
EUR 5,16 EUR 4,00
EUR 13,14 Livraison à EUR 0,01. Il ne reste plus que 14 exemplaire(s) en stock (d'autres exemplaires sont en cours d'acheminement). Expédié et vendu par Amazon. Emballage cadeau disponible.

Descriptions du produit

Revue de presse

" Unyielding, provocative, ambitious . . . filled with fascinating scientific research, is apt to find a receptive audience among citizens who hunger for a new progressive renaissance."
-San Francisco Chronicle

Présentation de l'éditeur

A groundbreaking scientific examination of the way our brains understand politics from a New York Times bestselling author

One of the world 's best-known linguists and cognitive scientists, George Lakoff has a knack for making science make sense for general readers. In his new book, Lakoff spells out what cognitive science has discovered about reason, and reveals that human reason is far more interesting than we thought it was. Reason is physical, mostly unconscious, metaphorical, emotion-laden, and tied to empathy-and there are biological explanations behind our moral and political thought processes. His call for a New Enlightenment is a bold and striking challenge to the cherished beliefs not only of philosophers, but of pundits, pollsters, and political leaders. The Political Mind is a passionate, erudite, and groundbreaking book that will appeal to anyone interested in how the mind works and how we function socially and politically.


Vendez cet article - Prix de rachat jusqu'à EUR 3,22
Vendez The Political Mind: A Cognitive Scientist's Guide to Your Brain and Its Politics contre un chèque-cadeau d'une valeur pouvant aller jusqu'à EUR 3,22, que vous pourrez ensuite utiliser sur tout le site Amazon.fr. Les valeurs de rachat peuvent varier (voir les critères d'éligibilité des produits). En savoir plus sur notre programme de reprise Amazon Rachète.

Détails sur le produit

  • Broché: 320 pages
  • Editeur : Penguin Books; Édition : Reprint (2 juin 2009)
  • Langue : Anglais
  • ISBN-10: 0143115685
  • ISBN-13: 978-0143115687
  • Dimensions du produit: 13,9 x 1,8 x 21,4 cm
  • Moyenne des commentaires client : 2.0 étoiles sur 5  Voir tous les commentaires (1 commentaire client)
  • Classement des meilleures ventes d'Amazon: 137.580 en Livres anglais et étrangers (Voir les 100 premiers en Livres anglais et étrangers)
  • Table des matières complète
  •  Souhaitez-vous compléter ou améliorer les informations sur ce produit ? Ou faire modifier les images?


En savoir plus sur l'auteur

Découvrez des livres, informez-vous sur les écrivains, lisez des blogs d'auteurs et bien plus encore.

Dans ce livre (En savoir plus)
Parcourir et rechercher une autre édition de ce livre.
Première phrase
Radical conservatives have been fighting a culture war. Lire la première page
Parcourir les pages échantillon
Couverture | Copyright | Table des matières | Extrait | Index | Quatrième de couverture
Rechercher dans ce livre:

Commentaires en ligne

2.0 étoiles sur 5
5 étoiles
0
4 étoiles
0
3 étoiles
0
2 étoiles
1
1 étoiles
0
Voir le commentaire client
Partagez votre opinion avec les autres clients

Commentaires client les plus utiles

Par JSC le 14 décembre 2013
Format: Broché Achat vérifié
On y apprend des choses, grâce à des concepts + exemples originaux mais au final on retombe souvent sur des choses dites précédemment dans le livre. Lakoff rabache un peu trop à mon goût.
Remarque sur ce commentaire Avez-vous trouvé ce commentaire utile ? Oui Non Commentaire en cours d'envoi...
Merci pour votre commentaire. Si ce commentaire est inapproprié, dites-le nous.
Désolé, nous n'avons pas réussi à enregistrer votre vote. Veuillez réessayer

Commentaires client les plus utiles sur Amazon.com (beta)

Amazon.com: 65 commentaires
171 internautes sur 194 ont trouvé ce commentaire utile 
Brainy politics vs Enlightenment politics? 3 juin 2008
Par Kerry Walters - Publié sur Amazon.com
Format: Relié
George Lakoff, cognitive scientist and political commentator, returns in The Political Mind to themes already made familiar in earlier books such as Moral Politics (2002), Don't Think of an Elephant (2004) and Whose Freedom? (2007). He argues that political discourse arises from a process of conceptual and metaphorical framing which ultimately is grounded in the way the brain works, and that an understanding of this process is essential for successful political campaigns.

I don't know that there's really anything in The Political Mind that Lakoff hasn't already said in one form or another elsewhere (the primary reason for the three-star rating). But he does stress here what he sees as the errors of the theory of mind he argues was formed by the Enlightenment and which political progressives still assume today. Lakoff characterizes that theory as stressing the transparency of mind, drawing a sharp division between reason and emotion, and assuming that reason is a universal human capacity that accurately describes the world. But nothing in this model, asserts Lakoff, is correct. Much of what we call the mind is unconscious; what we think, because of our tendency to operate through largely unconscious metaphorical frames, is largely constitutive rather than straightforwardly conceptual; and reason is rarely dispassionately reflective.

So what's the connection between all this and politics? Simply, claims Lakoff, that progressive politicians still buy into the Enlightenment model of mind, and operate accordingly in trying to influence voters and win elections. "Rational" arguments in the Enlightenment mode are ineffective because they rest on a false understanding of how the mind works--the assumption that our decisions are made consciously, abstractly, and dispassionately. What grabs attention is the effective use of metaphors and stories that tap into unconscious frame networks. Progressives need to reframe the conversation to get across their values more effectively--and it just so happens that those values (for example, empathy rather than the Enlightenment ideal of self-interest) are hardwired in the brain.

Lakoff's book is interesting, and certainly deserves its day in court. But ultimately I find his argument here (as in his previous books) problematic. First, his characterization of the Enlightenment understanding of mind runs the risk of being a caricature. Enlightenment philosophers weren't monolithic in their thinking. Anyone who's read Rousseau or Hume appreciates that the Enlightenment understanding of reason is much more complex than the way in which Lakoff describes it. Ditto with self interest, which Lakoff claims is the key to Enlightenment values. Adam Smith and other Enlightenment ethicists stressed the fundamental moral importance of "sympathy" (closely akin to what Lakoff calls "empathy") just as much as self-interest. Second, it's not clear to me why Lakoff thinks that brain science clinches his political advice. Can't similar conclusions be arrived at through psychological analysis? How does neurological reductionism make his arguments any stronger? Third, and more importantly, one sometimes gets the impression that Lakoff is innocent of the last 150 years of philosophy. That humans think in frames, that reason is constitutive rather than merely descriptive, that mind isn't transparently conscious, and that there isn't a hard-and-fast divide between cognition and emotions, has been defended by (for example) Kant, Hegel, Nietzsche, and most postmodern thinkers. Does anyone, except the few hardcore positivists left around, think otherwise today? How is it, then, that the cognitive sciences have suddenly made this discovery? Finally, it's not entirely clear to me what Lakoff thinks the advantage of adopting a 21st century theory of mind when it comes to politics is other than its effectiveness in influencing people and winning elections. Ought progressives to do so because it will make them better manipulators of public opinion? Or ought progressives to do so because it's more promotive of truth? And is it really the case that the brain is hardwired for all the values that Lakoff associates with progressivism? Which, of course, invites the question of what the status of truth itself is in a model of mind which reduces ideas to brain processes and reason to enframing.
37 internautes sur 40 ont trouvé ce commentaire utile 
How to Frame Political Debates 18 juillet 2008
Par Ken Ransford - Publié sur Amazon.com
Format: Relié
We think in metaphors, and words describe metaphors. A metaphor is a description like "He's cold as ice." He's not cold, he's unfriendly, but we know what it means. Metaphors form neural pathways, or connections, between neurons. The more we activate the pathways, the stronger they become, and the more we accept them as true. Metaphors, words, thoughts, and language therefore have a neurological basis that result from physical transformation of brains (actual physiological change to brain cells similar to increased muscle mass that results from weight lifting).

Republicans have intuitively known this and have used language to create metaphors and neural pathways that have become dogmatic in America--example: tax relief, page 234. Relief is not normally connected to taxes (road building, social security, and armed forces result from taxes, not relief). However, tax relief has become a metaphor in the US that is identified as generally good, and puts anyone who criticizes the concept on the defensive.

The conservative Republican model society is based on Old Testament concepts: right and wrong are absolute. It is based on a strict father model (page 78) that relies on discipline. The father tells the children how to behave and punishes them if they do not heed the father. Children learn discipline so they will do the right thing without question (think of Marines who obey commands in the heat of war as described in the book Flags of Our Fathers, James Bradley and Ron Powers, 2001). Obeying authority without questioning it is paramount. That's why Republicans supported President Bush's pardon of Scooter Libby for lying to Congress - Libby was merely obeying orders. Once discipline is learned, there is no need for government since disciplined individuals don't need any outside help. Discipline leads to self-reliance, and government aid like social security is not only unnecessary, it leads to weakness because it causes citizens to lose their self reliance. Authority is absolute, and so is the requirement to obey it. That is why conservatives are so threatened when their position is criticized--it is tantamount to questioning authority, and absolute authority is fundamental to their view of the world.

Liberals, or progressives as George Lakoff prefers to call them, start from a nurturing concept. Children do not need discipline, they need nurturance. Government stands for the proposition that it permits people to flourish. Roads permit commerce, medicine protects our health, police and firemen protect us from catastrophe, the FDA protects us from corporations whose zeal for profit would lead them to sell drugs with harmful side effects, and the SEC protects us from unscrupulous traders that would manipulate markets for private gain.

People think by emotion, and progressives try to reason according to rational, Old Enlightenment, factual-based logic. Progressives need to appeal to people's emotions more. Emotions, like metaphors, are established neural pathways in mature brains, and progressives need to adopt frames that tap into voters' nurturing neural pathways.

Progressives should not permit conservatives to force them into responding (and therefore adopting) conservative frames (see page 153 regarding Obama's response to Wolf Blitzer's question on mandatory English in the US). The technique is to 1) describe the frame that the questioner has just used; 2) describe what's wrong with the frame; and 3) come up with an alternate frame.

People have natural tendencies that can be politically manipulated. See "Why Hawks Win," page 223, for an example of why it is easier to convince citizens to go to war than it is to object going to war. Again, the solution is to reframe the debate; to point out the errors in going to war. Would we have invaded Iraq if it was a prelude to endless war, rather than a war on terrorists that would soon be "Mission Accomplished?"

The book's strengths are 1) describing conservative and progressive thought processes, and 2) describing neurological and psychological research that support the biological bases for thought and linguistics.

The book's shortcomings are 1) failing to provide concrete examples of conservative frames and how to specifically counter them, and 2) failing to theorize how people become conservative or progressive over time, and whether they can be manipulated to become conservative or progressive as they mature.
77 internautes sur 88 ont trouvé ce commentaire utile 
Rich, like chocolate cake 15 juin 2008
Par Michael P. Maslanka - Publié sur Amazon.com
Format: Relié
While building on his previous books, Lakoff also gets into a new area: the use of narratives in poltics.The DWIs and purorted drug use of President Bush ,standing alone, never mattered because people saw him through the narrative of Redemption, the overcoming of adversity and the possibility of salvation. The opening section on Anna Nicole Smith and the narratives used to view her contain some of the book's best writing. it also helps explain the power of Senator Clinton---women who have it rough(sex discrimination, faithless husband etc) don't just identify with her, they are her and she is them as she struggled for the nomination. He hammers away ,as before on frames and the building of them. As a trial attorney I see this all the time---if the other side responds to my framing, I will usually win because in telling their "story" they just end up repeating mine. Instead, to be persuasive you must create a different story. The Dems are still having a hard time grasping this fundamental truth.Some good stuff on how we are wired for empathy. He coins a new word "privateering" for what happens when a government function is abandoned by government and handed over to corporations; ie a wealth transfer, think no bid contracts a la Iraq and Katrina.The book is like chocolate cake---almost too rich, and it loses focus as it goes along. Still , it deserves a 5 star rating because it is a book of ideas, which is always welcome, no matter party affliation.
42 internautes sur 48 ont trouvé ce commentaire utile 
novel, insightful, invaluable 1 juillet 2009
Par Bartmore Grund - Publié sur Amazon.com
Format: Broché
This is Lakoff's latest and most fascinating elaboration of mind/metaphor theory since its appearance in "Women, Fire and Dangerous Things" (1987). It is arguably the most important, too, as his discussion makes sense of the reasons behind stark differences we may notice in disparate attitudes about pressing things that matter to us here and now - public policies, policy makers, and the institutions of power that touch our lives.

Drawing on the latest brain science and a very nice range of examples to support his case, Lakoff develops logically persuasive and easily understood models for the cognitive cause-and-effect relationships that emerge as political differences. So straightforward are these approaches to discerning and understanding political differences voiced in public discourse that they prove again the case he has been building for what's really going on beneath the surface.

Students/readers of linguistics, communication theory, sociology, political science, cultural studies, philosophy/epistemology would find this book illuminating and invaluable.
31 internautes sur 35 ont trouvé ce commentaire utile 
A must read for anyone in the political world! 11 août 2009
Par Todd Bartholomew - Publié sur Amazon.com
Format: Broché
Lackoff is perhaps the foremost linguist and cognitive scientist working in the realm of political speech and this iteration of "The Political Mind" follows on the heels of his 2008 book "The Political Mind: You Can't Understand 21st Century American Politics with an 18th Century Brain" as well as "Framing the Debate" (2007), "Thinking Points" (2006) and "Don't Think of an Elephant" (2004), all of which focus on how politicians employ language to frame their arguments. For a layperson the idea of reading a book on linguistics and cognitive science sounds daunting, but Lakoff is a master at making the material easy to understand while not dumbing things down. The main idea Lakoff puts forward is that reason is mostly unconscious and challenges the conventional wisdom of many political scientists, political theorists, policy makers and other scholars regarding how to frame issues for the electorate. The key problem for those parties, to Lakoff's theory, is that they fail to grasp the biological explanations that drive the electorate's thought processes. Lakoff frequently points to the successes Republicans have had in framing issues through narratives when presenting ideas to the electorate rather than presenting raw facts, statistics and data which largely leave voters to frame the issue in their own minds. The net result is voters understand the narratives presented by Republicans to frame the argument. Failure to frame the information presented results in widely varying degrees of comprehension and mixed messages or in some cases the "paralysis of analysis." This is perhaps the argument that is of most value to political scientists, theorists, and policy makers but potentially the hardest for some to embrace as it runs counter to long-held beliefs.

"The Political Mind" is indeed a thought provoking book and it abounds with ideas and concepts relating to political theory. Lakoff's arguments are relatively simple, straightforward, and easy to grasp, but written in a prose that will certainly appeal to the reader and their intellect. The decidedly retro cover may be a bit offputting with its 1970s graphic, but don't let that fool you; "The Political Mind" is a must read for anyone in the political world!
Ces commentaires ont-ils été utiles ? Dites-le-nous


Commentaires

Souhaitez-vous compléter ou améliorer les informations sur ce produit ? Ou faire modifier les images?