İçimdeki Psikopat

His personal story adds a compelling layer to the scientific insights. I'm curious how much of the book is driven by his own curiosity versus research needs.

The way he intertwines his life with neuroscience made complex topics more relatable. Did this approach make the science more accessible or did it feel like a personal diary at times?

He explores the nature of psychopathy, but I wonder how he balances the idea of biology versus free will. Does the book suggest that understanding the brain can change how we view morality?