The Polarized Mind: Why It's Killing Us and What We Can Do about It Paperback – Import, 17 April 2013

Provides excellent insights into what has motivated divisions and conflicts among the human race through the ages. Only If we can really grasp what divides us, can we begin to focus meaningfully on what can bring us together as fellow residents and stewards of planet earth, and only if we do that will we survive. This book is a great beginning for that process.

A heartfelt plea for people to think. Good luck with that. Rails (very politely) against the lack of thought in politics and public life, particularly in the USA. We must keep plugging away though.

Just finished *The Polarized Mind*, and I must admit I enjoyed it greatly. This is probably due to the fact that I had little trouble agreeing with the broad generalizations or the the easygoing writing style. In terms of critique, however, I add that I was never clear what a society of non-polarized minds might look like, if such a thing is even possible (beyond the usual list of extraordinary people — very similar to Maslow’s list of self-transcendent individuals). This is very hard to imagine since speech, language, and therefore thought is built from within binary oppositions: we need polarities to think between, to compare & contrast, and to carry on external or internal dialogues (i.e., thought). I presume the extremist or fanatic individuals/societies Schneider mentions are intended to portray those who are pulled over to only one side of the polarity continuum and embrace it as the total truth, simultaneously fearing & becoming hostile to its opposite. Fair enough. Of course we all choose varying positions somewhere along the continuum between polarities, sometimes even contradictory ones. Polarization of thought & action is certainly as personal as it is historical, but Schneider's point is that great evil comes from extremist polarizations (demonizing the opposite point of view). No doubt true, so I felt agreement. I also loved the dash through nasty fanatic polarizations of history and, to tell the truth, the list of horrors was quite spellbinding. Startling to learn that Mao was likely responsible for more deaths than Hitler & Stalin combined. (As for whole city slaughters, Schneider could have mentioned the Siege of Baghdad by the Mongols in 1258, which ended with probably a million to more dead.) But, as the author himself admitted in passing, this book is not a scholarly review. Broad generalizations do not a history make. To pull up names of a number civilizations, campaigns, or individuals as examples of polarized thinking and reduce inextricable complex causes and effects to the mindset of the polarized mind seemed almost random and ignored other perspectives and other historical events that were occurring simultaneously that might be seen as “good" (i.e., non-polarized), though Schneider did note that in larger, complex social systems both were often taking place at the same time (e.g., the non-polarized dervish movement amidst the bloody Moslem conquests). To rename evil “the polarized mind” is still to discuss evil, about which much as been written elsewhere. Still, in short, I loved the read but found no real solutions to the human condition. Of course we fear oblivion and death; it probably arrives with consciousness, but to describe the fanatic mind in even one of the author's breezed-through cultural periods or war atrocities would take much more in-depth research. The continuum of polarization may BE the human condition, at least until we can transcend our culturally-constructed selfhood. But then how will we think? Who will we be?

Love the way it is written. Seems that the author really believes in his subject matter and has a good understanding of the human mind.

This book is not worth buying and was a disappointment. The main idea is certainly important enough--the polarized mind is killing us, but Schneider's zip through history to press and to prove his point is trite. The story told lacks depth and is unconvincing. I was hoping his chapters on awe would prove worthwhile, but, again, these chapters also seemed unfinished. Schneider is not a bad writer, and he has written important books in psychology. I respect his articles and some of his other books. Perhaps this book was intended for the mass market or had to be rushed. I suggest you pick up some other books he and others have written. For a more worthwhile read along similar lines try this free pdf of Altemeyer's book on authoritarians: [...] and then read one of Schneider's other books on awe.