The comment that linked to the New Statesman article was helpful. Another good source on how much (or how little) to take most neuroscience hype seriously is the book
Brainwashed: The Seductive Appeal of Mindless Neuroscience by Sally Satel adn Scott O. Lilienfeld.[1] Eventually, someday, as the article kindly submitted here for discussion suggests, there will be some actionable knowledge for daily life derived from neuroscience studies, but meanwhile the hype far exceeds the reality. As the article points out, "Paul Fletcher, professor of health neuroscience at Cambridge University, explains that this is the major obstacle for progress in the field. 'Nobody has a credible idea of how brain processes produce mental processes, or even a vocabulary with which to articulate such an idea, should it suddenly come to them in the bath,' he says. 'Good science is usually about linking levels of description: showing how an observation at one level – say, the genetic – ultimately manifests in a physiological process or behaviour or symptom through a series of intermediary facts each expressed at intervening levels… We just don't have these linkages in brain-mind science; it's like the brain observations are made in one language and the mind observations in another, and there is no clue how to translate between those languages.'"
[1] http://www.amazon.com/Brainwashed-Seductive-Appeal-Mindless-...