Brainwashed Summary

Book Review 1
The book review is about the book titled “Brainwashed: the seductive appeal of mindless neuroscience”. The book was published a couple of years ago in 2013 in New York by Sally Satel and Scott O. Lilienfeld. I chose to write a review on this book because a couple of years ago when I started school at Portland State, I had joined a book club through the neuroscience club at PSU, where they chose this book for a term. During that time, the book was very trending due to some contemporary topics mentioned in the book. The book reflects about some interesting topics that include the new areas of study in neuroscience like neuroeconomy, neuromarketing, and neurolaw . The brain imaging and the functional magnetic resonance imaging
The chapter describes how addiction is considered as a “brain” disease and argue against it. The authors uses Bob Schuster as an example to support the argument. They also explain it with the study that was conducted after the Vietnam war, and how most soldiers stopped using narcotics, and heroin after returning home (Lilienfield & Satel, 2013). Consequently, this study proved that the hypothesis “once and addict, always an addict” cannot hold true (Lilienfield & Satel, 2013). The brain disease model of neuroscience has helped to find the reasons behind addiction that include genetics, and prolonged substance use. The following chapter is related to deception and how it could be used to detect deception and lying (Lilienfield & Satel, 2013). It also provides some interesting statistics about deception and (Lilienfield & Satel, 2013). For instance, 1 out of every 5 social interaction lasting more than 10 minutes contain 112 expressions of deception that have are lie or memorized lies (Lilienfield & Satel, 2013). The overall theme of this chapter is to tell that neuroscience cannot be applied to detection of deception (Lilienfield & Satel,
The term neurolaw is defined as the principle that overlaps between brain science, legal theory, and moral philosophy (Lilienfield & Satel, 2013). The significance of the law is that function of brain and brain images help explain the defendant’s behavior (Lilienfield & Satel, 2013). The chapter also tells that there are several challenges that include the relationship between brain function and images, time scan, implication of conduct caused by brain function (Lilienfield & Satel, 2013). Thus, the author claims that neuroscience does not hold true for deception and detection of