1) His tone is often self-congratulatory and borderline boastful, which is hard to get past.
2) He has far too much confidence in the results of his experiments, and presents his interpretations of the results as the only possible interpretation. I doubt his conclusions would stand up well to a thorough peer review.
3) His defense against those who are concerned about the future use of neuromarketing for nefarious purposes is that it (neuromarketing) will enable marketers to design products that consumers will like more. This assumes that consumers only want things that are good for them (or at least things that will make them happier). In his ethical argument, he ignores people's desire to buy cigarettes, adjustable mortgages and other products that could be made more appealling by neuromarketing, then discusses these in detail later on.
4) His attempts to add drama and storytelling to accounts of brain imaging experiments are clumsy and over the top. The chapters are drenched with words like "astonishing", "amazement", "shocking" and "unbelievable". Felt like a used car salesman trying to sell me his ideas with circus ringmaster-style hyperbole, instead of logic.
1) Modern brain imaging provides a surprising amount of insight into some human behaviours. Just not as much insight as the author claims it does.
Report Inappropriate Content