This book was not what I expected. As other reviewers have said, it felt rather wandering. I also had trouble getting into it. It will be a fascinating read for the right reader, but that may be a small audience.

This book challenges conventional views of reality, consciousness, and the self, drawing on psychology, neuroscience, and philosophy. It helps readers identify mental biases, embrace ambiguity, and develop flexible thinking—fostering self-acceptance, resilience, empathy, and a deeper understanding of interconnectedness.

This book contains good information, but it unfortunately overstates its case. It uses rhetorical tricks to make its point rather than sticking with science. Humans have an identity and a physical self, even if those things aren’t static over time. To say otherwise is nonsense.

Thanks, NetGalley, for the ARC I received. This is my honest and voluntary review.

The author has a vague, meandering, and often repetitive communication style. The excessive and inappropriate use of commas does not help. I kept waiting for him to say something clearly and succinctly. Even on page 24, he was still discussing what his book was going to be about: “This book delves into common, sometimes helpful but often unhelpful, models of the idea of mind. It looks at how these ideas help us, harm us, or in many cases do both.”
Were I editing the above two sentences, I’d suggest the following instead: “This book examines models of the mind and the ways in which they can help or harm us—and sometimes do both.”

By page 24, I’d sampled enough of this frustrating work to know I wasn’t going to get on with it. I did not have the sense that a colleague or an intelligent layperson had offered the author much-needed feedback for improvement. As the book now stands, it is not clear, accessible, or enjoyable. I honestly don’t know who Fisher’s intended audience is. The only thing I am sure of is that his writing is a barrier rather than a portal to new ideas.

Not recommended.

Unfortunately, I have little positive thoughts about this book. After my first read, I went back and reread most parts to check if a lack of understanding or a misunderstanding is causing me to have had a read which I did not enjoy at all.
And my criticism about this book is on multiple forts and strong. I feel a bit misled by the blurb. I would still be happy to read a book that summarises theories, practices and approaches on self-conviction, but this was disorganised, and I would like to leave it at that. I do not wish to stir the audiences who might enjoy or benefit from this book from it.
All the best to you, book.