Although the writing is so-so, the book covers multiple Less Wrong-relevant themes, from reductionism to neuroscience to decision theory.

Agree.

I doubt many economists are aware researchers can point to something very similar to utility on a brain scanner and would scoff at the very notion.

Agree.

Because of the book's wide target audience, there is not enough detail for specialists, but possibly a little too much for non-specialists. If you are interested in this topic, the best reason to pick up the book would be to track down further references.

Agree.

Your review may be more readable than my post on the neuroscience of desire, though my post benefited from including lots of references for people who don't want to buy the book, and of course I included that awesome reductionism graphic from the last chapter.

One thing I'll note is that it bothers me that Glimcher concludes so much on the basis of eye movement studies. This is why I'm unsure as to whether Glimcher's view of valuation is correct, as opposed to the view of other neuroeconomists who deny the plausibility of 'something like utility' being encoded in the brain (except for some specialized tasks like eye movement).

Anyway: More like this, please!