Scan barcode
wander_er's review against another edition
4.0
The psychology behind Sherlock's method. A bit repetitive, not as instructional as I had hoped, but still an interesting read. Recommended for anyone who has a passing interest in psychology and/or loves anything to do with Holmes.
remile's review against another edition
4.0
Interesting read, useful examples.
Drew a picture of the summary: http://mt.artofmemory.com/forums/rgb-system (search for "mastermind")
Drew a picture of the summary: http://mt.artofmemory.com/forums/rgb-system (search for "mastermind")
alfsan's review against another edition
2.0
*A tad disappointed*
I waited for almost a year to read this book since it was on my 2016 reading list and had others before.
Since it came out I got it on my kindle and had very high expectations. I made my self ideas of what the book would be about, and as the title suggested, I expected a crash course on understanding the mental process of "deduction" that distinguishes mr. Holmes.
To start my review, I have to say that it felt as if this was a PhD or a Master Thesis on Conan Doyle's character and his interpretations in different situations with a bit of a re-write in order to fit a larger commercial audience. For starters I found it a bit annoying that you must have read ALL of Sherlocks Holmes collection to understand what she was trying to explain. And regarding the analysis of the methods? they were very superficial, hard to emulate and were more focused in the "mindset" or mind-process Sherlock was having, than a good explanation in how to achieve or start to train certain processes. That is why I felt that this book was more of a PhD thesis regarding Sherlock Holmes rather than a non-fiction book.
Why didn't I give it one star? because of her research and bibliography. You can literally skip to the last pages and see the books used in the research and from that you'll gain more value than the book it self.
I waited for almost a year to read this book since it was on my 2016 reading list and had others before.
Since it came out I got it on my kindle and had very high expectations. I made my self ideas of what the book would be about, and as the title suggested, I expected a crash course on understanding the mental process of "deduction" that distinguishes mr. Holmes.
To start my review, I have to say that it felt as if this was a PhD or a Master Thesis on Conan Doyle's character and his interpretations in different situations with a bit of a re-write in order to fit a larger commercial audience. For starters I found it a bit annoying that you must have read ALL of Sherlocks Holmes collection to understand what she was trying to explain. And regarding the analysis of the methods? they were very superficial, hard to emulate and were more focused in the "mindset" or mind-process Sherlock was having, than a good explanation in how to achieve or start to train certain processes. That is why I felt that this book was more of a PhD thesis regarding Sherlock Holmes rather than a non-fiction book.
Why didn't I give it one star? because of her research and bibliography. You can literally skip to the last pages and see the books used in the research and from that you'll gain more value than the book it self.
haraop's review against another edition
4.0
Konnikova really integrates Sherlock's novels into all of her book: She made a very good analysis of every behaviour and way of thinking of the famous character Sherlock Holmes, creating a way in which any one of us could learn his way of thinking.
Even though it's based on a fictional character, some people fail to remember or to realise that it's based off a real person: Joseph Bell. What should come to our atention is that is based of a person who lived more than 100 years ago, and still not many people has developed this type of thinking into the level that Bell did.
One thing that it makes the book a little bit heavy, is the amount of references to Doyle's books (which I haven't read yet by the way, but they're my next to-read books) that, not caring too much about spoilers (I might as well forgotten almost all of them), it just repeats itself through several parts of many paragraphs.
Nonetheless, it doesn't take out the power of learning that this book may have for readers to non-readers of Sherlock Holmes. It analyzes every part of Sherlock thinking, from the "brain attic" idea to the ways in which it's possible to improve ourselves in many ways, and it even made me write a nice summary in spanish (my native language) to show it to people I care about and improve our ways of thinking.
Even though it's based on a fictional character, some people fail to remember or to realise that it's based off a real person: Joseph Bell. What should come to our atention is that is based of a person who lived more than 100 years ago, and still not many people has developed this type of thinking into the level that Bell did.
One thing that it makes the book a little bit heavy, is the amount of references to Doyle's books (which I haven't read yet by the way, but they're my next to-read books) that, not caring too much about spoilers (I might as well forgotten almost all of them), it just repeats itself through several parts of many paragraphs.
Nonetheless, it doesn't take out the power of learning that this book may have for readers to non-readers of Sherlock Holmes. It analyzes every part of Sherlock thinking, from the "brain attic" idea to the ways in which it's possible to improve ourselves in many ways, and it even made me write a nice summary in spanish (my native language) to show it to people I care about and improve our ways of thinking.
patchworkbunny's review against another edition
4.0
Is Sherlock Holmes a genius or just a man with a well-trained mind? In Maria Konnikova’s popular psychology book, Mastermind: How to Think Like Sherlock Holmes, she compares the Sherlock system to the Watson system, using examples from the original stories to illustrate the methods.
It’s an odd combination of fact and fiction, one which works for me. You either have to go in with the idea that Sherlock and Watson are real people and they are being used as a case study. Or, you see it as a very detailed character analysis. Sherlock is so ingrained in our minds and culture, that it’s easy to forget he’s fictional, especially the way Konnikova describes him. Yet, it’s also quite interesting to look at it from a literary analysis view, if you forget the parts that are aimed at self-improvement.
Let’s face it, this book is not going to turn you into a mastermind overnight, however there are many aspects that I can completely relate to and I found myself going “I do that” several times. Sherlock’s brain attic is explained and the way we store memories. We need to be motivated at the point of learning in order to access those facts easily later on. Apply this theory to me; we have a daily music quiz we do at work and I am useless at it. It’s not that I don’t know any of the facts (although some have never even gone near my attic space) but I’m not that fussed about music. I will listen to it, I know enough to go and buy the right album when I want to, but I have no motivation to learn the details. So often I struggle to get the answer but when someone else says it, I know that I did have that knowledge. It just wasn’t to hand in the attic space. Yet I remember lots of things I read in books, because I want to review them and discuss and I generally find these random facts interesting. Incidentally, I read Fuse shortly after Mastermind and noticed a passage which described Pressia going through her mental attic for clues.
Watson is used throughout to illustrate the normal, untrained mind (that would be us) and also the fact that minds can change. Sherlock’s mistakes are also used to show that unless you keep exercising your mind (like a muscle) it will weaken. I would warn anyone who hasn’t read the Sherlock Holmes books, that Mastermind is riddled with spoilers, but it would mostly be aimed at fans of the canon. Whilst I know bits and pieces of the stories (so this didn’t bother me), it has instilled a desire to go back and read more of them.
It’s an odd combination of fact and fiction, one which works for me. You either have to go in with the idea that Sherlock and Watson are real people and they are being used as a case study. Or, you see it as a very detailed character analysis. Sherlock is so ingrained in our minds and culture, that it’s easy to forget he’s fictional, especially the way Konnikova describes him. Yet, it’s also quite interesting to look at it from a literary analysis view, if you forget the parts that are aimed at self-improvement.
Let’s face it, this book is not going to turn you into a mastermind overnight, however there are many aspects that I can completely relate to and I found myself going “I do that” several times. Sherlock’s brain attic is explained and the way we store memories. We need to be motivated at the point of learning in order to access those facts easily later on. Apply this theory to me; we have a daily music quiz we do at work and I am useless at it. It’s not that I don’t know any of the facts (although some have never even gone near my attic space) but I’m not that fussed about music. I will listen to it, I know enough to go and buy the right album when I want to, but I have no motivation to learn the details. So often I struggle to get the answer but when someone else says it, I know that I did have that knowledge. It just wasn’t to hand in the attic space. Yet I remember lots of things I read in books, because I want to review them and discuss and I generally find these random facts interesting. Incidentally, I read Fuse shortly after Mastermind and noticed a passage which described Pressia going through her mental attic for clues.
Watson is used throughout to illustrate the normal, untrained mind (that would be us) and also the fact that minds can change. Sherlock’s mistakes are also used to show that unless you keep exercising your mind (like a muscle) it will weaken. I would warn anyone who hasn’t read the Sherlock Holmes books, that Mastermind is riddled with spoilers, but it would mostly be aimed at fans of the canon. Whilst I know bits and pieces of the stories (so this didn’t bother me), it has instilled a desire to go back and read more of them.
stapilus's review against another edition
5.0
Some interesting concepts here. It'll take some time to jell, but the meshing of recent research on psychology and the Holmes stories makes for an entertaining run through how people approach memory and imagination. May be enlightening for a number of readers.
marleah_a's review against another edition
2.0
This book was an interesting review of various psychological experiments and concepts, and it was fun within the framework of Holmes stories. However, I didn't think that it was pulled together well enough or with enough common threads to follow through on the subtitle's promise.
the_mads_hatter's review against another edition
3.0
This is not a good book if you’re trying to learn deduction but it is good writing. Wouldn’t recommend as a great read for learning and applying deduction... but a nonfiction book concerning Sherlock? Sure.