The Chimp Paradox - Dumbed Down Pseudo-Psychology - A Review

The Chimp Paradox by Steve Peters is a very popular intro to self help book that argues that you can split your brain/personality into a Chimp half (irrational, emotive, needy, undisciplined) and a human half (rational, calm, driven). For those unfamiliar with any psychological concepts this can be a useful exercise but ultimately is baseless, unscientific and copies the theories of far more accomplished psychologists and dumbs them down in a profoundly unhelpful way.

I am not impressed by this book. It is a slog to get through, feels like it is written for 15 year olds and is unhelpful in the approaches it tries to take to self help. Actual psychological concepts and personality are explained by Jordan Peterson online for free in an extremely informative manor that this book cannot compare too. I would recommend you watch his Personality and Transformation series for a grounding in psychology and personality that is infinitely more helpful than this book.

Overall not recommended. There are better self help books on the market that don't view your emotions as antagonistic to your rationality and instead focus on integrating the passions and relationality to become a more complete person. Big on promises, lacking in substance

[goodgirlsguide]

He didn't describe the monkey as difficult to get along with - he talks about the emotional reaction being difficult. He didn't say all the emotions were irrational either or childlike. He also mentions planets... they are symbolic just like Freuds concepts. Freud's theories had no scientific basis either and the personalities theories don't fit most people anyway. How do they address your problems? personality theories don't do that. People respond differently in different context so are they really 'personality types' or just responses?

[SuseTheSchmoose]

I’m reading it now and it repeatedly states that the chimp (emotions) is not ‘good’ or ‘bad’, that it can be your best friend or worst enemy. So whilst I agree that there is a heavy emphasis on emotion management I wouldn’t say that the message of the book is that emotions are bad. Also, I think the point of the book is to make applied psychology accessible to everyone. There is a lot of evidence in the field of education about how important metaphors are for communicating complex ideas especially anything medical in a way that makes them easy to grasp. I’d say the author has pretty good credentials and many decades of experience as a psychiatrist and also it’s really significant that he is a psychiatrist who is working outside the medical model.

[nigel_g_richards]

Of course it is simplified down so that people who are not into psychology can understand it. Steve invented the Model to enable his students in Hallam University to better understand how the brain worked. I thank God he did because it has changed my life beyond belief.

How you can describe it as "A slog" to get through I really don't know, but as you say everyone has their opinion. Also your continual comments quoting it is not based on scientific evidence really shows how little research your have done into Professor Peters back ground. As the whole model is based on his findings of thousands of brain scans he has done over decades.

[tombrennan]

It’s not a theory, it’s a model. A model that doesn’t ask “why” but offers advice on how to change your behaviour. Can I suggest you write down what you want to say. That way you avoid repetition, repetition and repetition. It’s not a book about avoiding your problems, it’s a way of possibly dealing with them in a positive way. It’s not a clinical book, nor does it pretend to be. It’s accessible and concentrates on outcomes rather than causes. It’s strength lies in its simplicity. To mistake this simplicity for “dumbing down” does the book great disservice.

[goodgirlsguide]

I think you need to read it again. I am only up to chapter 3 but he does mention why people are anxious. He says the emotions offer flight, fight or freeze but is unable to make a decision so becomes anxious.

[StuartRimmington]

I hope you've read and taken on board the comments here. Whilst I do have some reservations about this book, I think that some of the things you have said about it are simply factually incorrect. I agree with the comment that (despite finding it 'a slog') you may need to read it again and pay more attention. As has been stated, he is not saying that something is good, bad or to be ignore, but more about an awareness of how we respond and managing that, to get optimal results. In other words to make the best of both the primitive parts of the brain and our ability to think logically. I hope you're not a psychology student - if you are, let's hope you have made some progress since this review.

[MaxMax-thuz]

I think it’s a great book ! It’s like my bible !

[alanlee]

I think you should write a book. Sounds like you have quite a bit of knowledge.

[joewragg]

Is this book based on a lot of scientific research? and then the science is just simplified down into a model so people can understand and use it?