Pub Date : 2023-07-01DOI: 10.1080/0964704X.2023.2171799
Barbara Schildkrout
Between 1882 and 2016, the medical literature offered a variety of etiologic hypotheses to explain Joan of Arc's voices, visions, and unwavering belief that she was the instrument of God. Although Joan lived from 1412 to 1431, there is extensive primary documentation of her life, including transcripts of her testimony during the Trial of Condemnation. Once this source material was compiled and made available, physician-authors began to theorize about Joan's neuropsychiatric symptoms in the context of her remarkable achievements. This article summarizes all papers written by physician-authors about Joan of Arc. The historical flow of diagnostic speculation in the medical literature reflects the cultural context in which it was produced as well as the emergence of novel ideas and new technologies in psychiatry, neurology, and neuropsychiatry. The early literature offered psychological theories and addressed the question of whether Joan was sane. The later literature focused on the possibility that Joan might have had epilepsy, with discussions of seizure etiology and possible cerebral focus, and also reflections on the purview of science as well as spirituality and the brain. This article offers the first comprehensive review of the medical literature about Joan of Arc, making this scholarship more accessible.
{"title":"What caused Joan of Arc's neuropsychiatric symptoms? Medical hypotheses from 1882 to 2016.","authors":"Barbara Schildkrout","doi":"10.1080/0964704X.2023.2171799","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/0964704X.2023.2171799","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Between 1882 and 2016, the medical literature offered a variety of etiologic hypotheses to explain Joan of Arc's voices, visions, and unwavering belief that she was the instrument of God. Although Joan lived from 1412 to 1431, there is extensive primary documentation of her life, including transcripts of her testimony during the Trial of Condemnation. Once this source material was compiled and made available, physician-authors began to theorize about Joan's neuropsychiatric symptoms in the context of her remarkable achievements. This article summarizes all papers written by physician-authors about Joan of Arc. The historical flow of diagnostic speculation in the medical literature reflects the cultural context in which it was produced as well as the emergence of novel ideas and new technologies in psychiatry, neurology, and neuropsychiatry. The early literature offered psychological theories and addressed the question of whether Joan was sane. The later literature focused on the possibility that Joan might have had epilepsy, with discussions of seizure etiology and possible cerebral focus, and also reflections on the purview of science as well as spirituality and the brain. This article offers the first comprehensive review of the medical literature about Joan of Arc, making this scholarship more accessible.</p>","PeriodicalId":49997,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the History of the Neurosciences","volume":"32 3","pages":"332-356"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2023-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"10030899","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-07-01DOI: 10.1080/0964704X.2023.2165853
Régis Olry
According to Galen of Pergamon (129–ca. 216), Greek physician Diocles of Carystus (ca 375 BCE–ca. 295 BCE) (Smith 1867, 1011), a pupil of Hippocrates of Kos (ca. 460 BCE–ca. 370 BCE), was the author of the first treatise of (animal) anatomy (Jouanna 1992, 435). But he is mostly credited with a very early description of a kind of gastritis that would be today considered a symptom of hypochondria (Wintrebert 2009, 44). Although retrospective medical diagnosis must always be taken warily, especially when the supposed disease is considered a psychological/psychiatric disorder, it seems that the concept—if not the term—of hypochondria dates back many centuries. Among celebrities of the early first millenium to have been recently diagnosed as probably suffering from hypochondria, one can mention Roman Stoic philosopher Seneca (ca. 4 BCE–65 CE), who has been described as a “malade imaginaire” (Courtil 2012) and even as the “greatest hypochondriac of the Antiquity” (Russell 1973, 80). Others include Roman Emperor Marcus Aurelius Antoninus (121–180; see Whitemore 1977), the Greek orator Publius Aelius Aristides Theodorus (117–181), and Byzantine Archbishop Theophylact of Ohrid (ca. 1050–ca. 1107; see Jouanno 2002).
{"title":"From hypochondrium to hypochondria.","authors":"Régis Olry","doi":"10.1080/0964704X.2023.2165853","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/0964704X.2023.2165853","url":null,"abstract":"According to Galen of Pergamon (129–ca. 216), Greek physician Diocles of Carystus (ca 375 BCE–ca. 295 BCE) (Smith 1867, 1011), a pupil of Hippocrates of Kos (ca. 460 BCE–ca. 370 BCE), was the author of the first treatise of (animal) anatomy (Jouanna 1992, 435). But he is mostly credited with a very early description of a kind of gastritis that would be today considered a symptom of hypochondria (Wintrebert 2009, 44). Although retrospective medical diagnosis must always be taken warily, especially when the supposed disease is considered a psychological/psychiatric disorder, it seems that the concept—if not the term—of hypochondria dates back many centuries. Among celebrities of the early first millenium to have been recently diagnosed as probably suffering from hypochondria, one can mention Roman Stoic philosopher Seneca (ca. 4 BCE–65 CE), who has been described as a “malade imaginaire” (Courtil 2012) and even as the “greatest hypochondriac of the Antiquity” (Russell 1973, 80). Others include Roman Emperor Marcus Aurelius Antoninus (121–180; see Whitemore 1977), the Greek orator Publius Aelius Aristides Theodorus (117–181), and Byzantine Archbishop Theophylact of Ohrid (ca. 1050–ca. 1107; see Jouanno 2002).","PeriodicalId":49997,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the History of the Neurosciences","volume":"32 3","pages":"373-383"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2023-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"9675623","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-07-01DOI: 10.1080/0964704X.2023.2179406
Diederik F Janssen
The famous discussion of Scythian cross-dressers in Hippocrates' Airs Waters Places (Aer.) 22 puzzled perhaps most medieval and Renaissance medical authorities. The text wrestled with a pre-Hippocratic, encephalocentric theory of spermatogenesis. Modern reception of the convoluted hypothesis put forward here gradually distilled three etiologies of failing virility: impotence, subfertility, and unmanliness. A gradual shift is discernable from increasingly Galenic neuro-andrological theories (sixteenth century) to neuropsychiatric (late-seventeenth through eighteenth century), phrenological and psychopathological (early- and late-nineteenth century), and finally early psycho-endocrinological (early-twentieth century) ideas about masculinity. Aer. 22 was a ubiquitously recurring reference across all of these episodes, indeed well beyond medicine, rendering it a highly sensitive index of change in neurodevelopmental and neuropsychiatric thinking. The pre-Enlightenment, neurology-centric onset of this extended modern history of sexual/gender medicine is briefly discussed, as well as its phrenological afterlife.
{"title":"<i>Venae spermaticae post aures</i>: The early modern angiology-neurology of virility.","authors":"Diederik F Janssen","doi":"10.1080/0964704X.2023.2179406","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/0964704X.2023.2179406","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The famous discussion of Scythian cross-dressers in Hippocrates' <i>Airs Waters Places</i> (<i>Aer</i>.) 22 puzzled perhaps most medieval and Renaissance medical authorities. The text wrestled with a pre-Hippocratic, encephalocentric theory of spermatogenesis. Modern reception of the convoluted hypothesis put forward here gradually distilled three etiologies of failing virility: impotence, subfertility, and unmanliness. A gradual shift is discernable from increasingly Galenic neuro-andrological theories (sixteenth century) to neuropsychiatric (late-seventeenth through eighteenth century), phrenological and psychopathological (early- and late-nineteenth century), and finally early psycho-endocrinological (early-twentieth century) ideas about masculinity. <i>Aer</i>. 22 was a ubiquitously recurring reference across all of these episodes, indeed well beyond medicine, rendering it a highly sensitive index of change in neurodevelopmental and neuropsychiatric thinking. The pre-Enlightenment, neurology-centric onset of this extended modern history of sexual/gender medicine is briefly discussed, as well as its phrenological afterlife.</p>","PeriodicalId":49997,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the History of the Neurosciences","volume":"32 3","pages":"357-372"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2023-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"10030917","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-07-01DOI: 10.1080/0964704X.2022.2162343
Sebastian C Galbo, Keith C Mages
This article examines the divisive reception history of American psychiatrist and neurologist Alexander McLane Hamilton's physiognomy publication, Types of Insanity (1883). By analyzing 23 book reviews published in late-nineteenth-century medical journals, the authors present a bibliographic case study that traces the mixed professional reactions to Hamilton's work, thus revealing the fraught nature of physiognomy in the American medical community. In effect, the authors argue that the interprofessional disagreements that emerged among journal reviewers indicate the nascent efforts of psychiatrists and neurologists to oppose physiognomy in the interest of professionalization. By extension, the authors emphasize the historical value of book reviews and reception literature. Often overlooked as ephemera, book reviews register the shifting ideologies, temperaments, and attitudes of an era's readership.
{"title":"Illustrating insanity: Allan McLane Hamilton, <i>Types of Insanity</i>, and physiognomy in late nineteenth-century American medicine.","authors":"Sebastian C Galbo, Keith C Mages","doi":"10.1080/0964704X.2022.2162343","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/0964704X.2022.2162343","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This article examines the divisive reception history of American psychiatrist and neurologist Alexander McLane Hamilton's physiognomy publication, <i>Types of Insanity</i> (1883). By analyzing 23 book reviews published in late-nineteenth-century medical journals, the authors present a bibliographic case study that traces the mixed professional reactions to Hamilton's work, thus revealing the fraught nature of physiognomy in the American medical community. In effect, the authors argue that the interprofessional disagreements that emerged among journal reviewers indicate the nascent efforts of psychiatrists and neurologists to oppose physiognomy in the interest of professionalization. By extension, the authors emphasize the historical value of book reviews and reception literature. Often overlooked as ephemera, book reviews register the shifting ideologies, temperaments, and attitudes of an era's readership.</p>","PeriodicalId":49997,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the History of the Neurosciences","volume":"32 3","pages":"301-331"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2023-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"9675220","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-04-13DOI: 10.1080/0964704X.2023.2193530
S. Finger
{"title":"Nervous Fictions: Literary Form and the Enlightenment Origins of Neuroscience","authors":"S. Finger","doi":"10.1080/0964704X.2023.2193530","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/0964704X.2023.2193530","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":49997,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the History of the Neurosciences","volume":"32 1","pages":"512 - 514"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2023-04-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44686316","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-04-13DOI: 10.1080/0964704x.2023.2193531
D. Lanska
{"title":"John Hughlings Jackson: Clinical Neurology, Evolution, and Victorian Brain Science","authors":"D. Lanska","doi":"10.1080/0964704x.2023.2193531","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/0964704x.2023.2193531","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":49997,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the History of the Neurosciences","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2023-04-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42246401","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-04-01DOI: 10.1080/0964704X.2021.2021704
Heinz Wässle, Sascha Topp
The Max Planck Institute (MPI) for Biophysical Chemistry (Karl-Friedrich Bonhoeffer Institute) was founded in 1971 in Göttingen. Two of the 11 departments at the institute had a neuroscientific focus. Otto D. Creutzfeldt (1927-1992) and Victor P. Whittaker (1919-2016) were directors of the Neurobiological and Neurochemical Departments, respectively. Creutzfeldt's department researched the structure and function of the cerebral cortex, and Whittaker's department concentrated on the biochemical analysis of synapses and synaptic vesicles. Creutzfeldt and Whittaker were already internationally respected scientists when they were appointed to Göttingen. The next generation of departmental directors, Erwin Neher and Bert Sakmann, were "home-grown" researchers from the institute and, during their time as junior group leaders, they developed the so-called patch clamp technique, with which they were able to measure single ion channels in nerve cells. This technique revolutionized neurophysiology, and Neher and Sakmann were awarded the 1991 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine for their work in this area. Neher was appointed director of the Membrane Biophysics Department in 1983 and, since then, his department has mainly examined the role of Ca2+ in the release of neurotransmitters at synapses and in the secretion of catecholamines from chromaffin cells. From 1985, Sakmann was director of the Cell Physiology Department, and his laboratory concentrated on the molecular and physiological characterization of transmitter receptors in postsynaptic membranes. In 1989, he was appointed to the MPI for Medical Research in Heidelberg. Reinhard Jahn became director of the Neurobiology Department in 1997, researching the molecular mechanisms of the release of neurotransmitters from the presynaptic terminals, and he discovered several proteins associated with the synaptic vesicles. With their work, Neher, Sakmann, and Jahn have made the MPI for Biophysical Chemistry one of the world's leading research centers for the transmission of signals at synapses.
马克斯普朗克生物物理化学研究所(Karl-Friedrich Bonhoeffer研究所)成立于1971年,网址为Göttingen。该研究所的11个系中有两个以神经科学为重点。Otto D. Creutzfeldt(1927-1992)和Victor P. Whittaker(1919-2016)分别担任神经生物学和神经化学系主任。Creutzfeldt的部门研究大脑皮层的结构和功能,Whittaker的部门专注于突触和突触囊泡的生化分析。当克鲁茨菲尔德和惠特克被任命为Göttingen时,他们已经是国际上受尊敬的科学家。下一代部门主管Erwin Neher和Bert Sakmann是该研究所“土生土长”的研究人员,在担任初级小组领导期间,他们开发了所谓的膜片钳技术,通过这种技术,他们能够测量神经细胞中的单个离子通道。这项技术彻底改变了神经生理学,Neher和Sakmann因在这一领域的工作而获得1991年诺贝尔生理学或医学奖。Neher于1983年被任命为膜生物物理系主任,从那时起,他的部门主要研究Ca2+在突触释放神经递质和从嗜铬细胞分泌儿茶酚胺中的作用。从1985年起,Sakmann担任细胞生理学系主任,他的实验室专注于突触后膜中传递受体的分子和生理特性。1989年,他被任命为海德堡MPI医学研究人员。Reinhard Jahn于1997年成为神经生物系主任,研究神经递质从突触前末端释放的分子机制,他发现了几种与突触囊泡相关的蛋白质。通过他们的工作,Neher、Sakmann和Jahn使MPI生物物理化学研究所成为世界领先的突触信号传输研究中心之一。
{"title":"The neurosciences at the Max Planck Institute for Biophysical Chemistry in Göttingen.","authors":"Heinz Wässle, Sascha Topp","doi":"10.1080/0964704X.2021.2021704","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/0964704X.2021.2021704","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The Max Planck Institute (MPI) for Biophysical Chemistry (Karl-Friedrich Bonhoeffer Institute) was founded in 1971 in Göttingen. Two of the 11 departments at the institute had a neuroscientific focus. Otto D. Creutzfeldt (1927-1992) and Victor P. Whittaker (1919-2016) were directors of the Neurobiological and Neurochemical Departments, respectively. Creutzfeldt's department researched the structure and function of the cerebral cortex, and Whittaker's department concentrated on the biochemical analysis of synapses and synaptic vesicles. Creutzfeldt and Whittaker were already internationally respected scientists when they were appointed to Göttingen. The next generation of departmental directors, Erwin Neher and Bert Sakmann, were \"home-grown\" researchers from the institute and, during their time as junior group leaders, they developed the so-called patch clamp technique, with which they were able to measure single ion channels in nerve cells. This technique revolutionized neurophysiology, and Neher and Sakmann were awarded the 1991 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine for their work in this area. Neher was appointed director of the Membrane Biophysics Department in 1983 and, since then, his department has mainly examined the role of Ca<sup>2+</sup> in the release of neurotransmitters at synapses and in the secretion of catecholamines from chromaffin cells. From 1985, Sakmann was director of the Cell Physiology Department, and his laboratory concentrated on the molecular and physiological characterization of transmitter receptors in postsynaptic membranes. In 1989, he was appointed to the MPI for Medical Research in Heidelberg. Reinhard Jahn became director of the Neurobiology Department in 1997, researching the molecular mechanisms of the release of neurotransmitters from the presynaptic terminals, and he discovered several proteins associated with the synaptic vesicles. With their work, Neher, Sakmann, and Jahn have made the MPI for Biophysical Chemistry one of the world's leading research centers for the transmission of signals at synapses.</p>","PeriodicalId":49997,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the History of the Neurosciences","volume":"32 2","pages":"173-197"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2023-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"9794727","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-04-01DOI: 10.1080/0964704X.2021.2019553
Florian Schmaltz
In 1985, historian Götz Aly published an article showing that the director of the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute for Brain Research, neuropathologist Julius Hallervorden (1882-1965), had acquired brains of Nazi "euthanasia" victims and brain specimens of at least 33 children gassed at the Brandenburg killing center on October 28, 1940, which were still kept by the Max Planck Institute for Brain Research. Aly criticized that the Max Planck Society had suppressed articles by journalist Hermann Brendel in the 1970s claiming that institutes of the Kaiser Wilhelm Society had conducted brain research within the framework of "euthanasia." New sources show that these articles, which were the subject of a lawsuit, were published in a newspaper called Freiheit run by the German branch of Scientology, of which Brendel was editor-in-chief. The articles were part of Scientology's antipsychiatry campaign. They mixed historical facts about racial hygiene and "euthanasia" in Nazi Germany with ludicrous and unfounded accusations alleging that violent, racist, and dehumanizing research methods typical in Nazi research were still carried out at the Max Planck Institute for Psychiatry. The legal conflict between the Max-Planck-Gesellschaft (MPG) and Scientology about the role of brain researchers in the Nazi era is analyzed here through combining perspectives from the history of neuroscience and socio-legal history. In contrast to trials of Nazi war crimes against "euthanasia" perpetrators, the civil law case of the MPG against Scientology from 1972 until 1975 instead concerned the instrumentalization of the Nazi past of psychiatry and brain research for ideological and commercial motives. The Scientology case caused social and legal ripples, and its after effects extended to 1986, when the MPG considered taking legal steps against Aly's publication.
{"title":"Brain research on Nazi \"euthanasia\" victims: Legal conflicts surrounding Scientology's instrumentalization of the Kaiser Wilhelm Society's history against the Max Planck Society.","authors":"Florian Schmaltz","doi":"10.1080/0964704X.2021.2019553","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/0964704X.2021.2019553","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In 1985, historian Götz Aly published an article showing that the director of the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute for Brain Research, neuropathologist Julius Hallervorden (1882-1965), had acquired brains of Nazi \"euthanasia\" victims and brain specimens of at least 33 children gassed at the Brandenburg killing center on October 28, 1940, which were still kept by the Max Planck Institute for Brain Research. Aly criticized that the Max Planck Society had suppressed articles by journalist Hermann Brendel in the 1970s claiming that institutes of the Kaiser Wilhelm Society had conducted brain research within the framework of \"euthanasia.\" New sources show that these articles, which were the subject of a lawsuit, were published in a newspaper called <i>Freiheit</i> run by the German branch of Scientology, of which Brendel was editor-in-chief. The articles were part of Scientology's antipsychiatry campaign. They mixed historical facts about racial hygiene and \"euthanasia\" in Nazi Germany with ludicrous and unfounded accusations alleging that violent, racist, and dehumanizing research methods typical in Nazi research were still carried out at the Max Planck Institute for Psychiatry. The legal conflict between the Max-Planck-Gesellschaft (MPG) and Scientology about the role of brain researchers in the Nazi era is analyzed here through combining perspectives from the history of neuroscience and socio-legal history. In contrast to trials of Nazi war crimes against \"euthanasia\" perpetrators, the civil law case of the MPG against Scientology from 1972 until 1975 instead concerned the instrumentalization of the Nazi past of psychiatry and brain research for ideological and commercial motives. The Scientology case caused social and legal ripples, and its after effects extended to 1986, when the MPG considered taking legal steps against Aly's publication.</p>","PeriodicalId":49997,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the History of the Neurosciences","volume":"32 2","pages":"240-264"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2023-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"9426074","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-04-01DOI: 10.1080/0964704X.2021.1898903
Bert Sakmann, Frank W Stahnisch
Dr. Bert Sakmann (b. 1942) studied at the Universities of Tuebingen, Freiburg, Berlin, Paris, and Munich, graduating in 1967. Much of his professional life has been spent in various institutes of the Max Planck Society. In 1971, a British Council Fellowship took him to the Department of Biophysics of University College London to work with Bernard Katz (1911-2003). In 1974, he obtained his Ph.D. from the University of Goettingen and, with Erwin Neher (b. 1944) at the Max Planck Institute for Biophysical Chemistry, began work that would transform cellular biology and neuroscience, resulting in the 1991 Nobel Prize for Physiology or Medicine. In 2008, Dr. Sakmann returned to Munich, where he headed the research group "Cortical Columns in Silico" at the Max Planck Institute of Neurobiology in Martinsried. Here, their group discovered the cell-type specific sensory activation patterns in different layers of a column in the vibrissal area of rodents' somatosensory cortices.
Bert Sakmann博士(生于1942年)曾在图宾根大学、弗莱堡大学、柏林大学、巴黎大学和慕尼黑大学学习,1967年毕业。他的大部分职业生涯都是在马克斯·普朗克学会的各个研究所度过的。1971年,他获得英国文化协会奖学金,前往伦敦大学学院生物物理系与伯纳德·卡茨(Bernard Katz, 1911-2003)共事。1974年,他在哥廷根大学获得博士学位,并在马克斯普朗克生物物理化学研究所与Erwin Neher(1944年出生)一起开始了细胞生物学和神经科学的研究,并获得了1991年诺贝尔生理学或医学奖。2008年,萨克曼博士回到慕尼黑,在马丁斯里德的马克斯·普朗克神经生物学研究所(Max Planck Institute of Neurobiology)领导“硅皮质柱”(Cortical Columns In silicon)研究小组。在这里,他们的研究小组发现了啮齿动物体感觉皮层振动区柱的不同层中细胞类型特定的感觉激活模式。
{"title":"Neuroscience history interview with Professor Bert Sakmann, Nobel Laureate in Physiology or Medicine (1991), Max Planck Society, Germany.","authors":"Bert Sakmann, Frank W Stahnisch","doi":"10.1080/0964704X.2021.1898903","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/0964704X.2021.1898903","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Dr. Bert Sakmann (b. 1942) studied at the Universities of Tuebingen, Freiburg, Berlin, Paris, and Munich, graduating in 1967. Much of his professional life has been spent in various institutes of the Max Planck Society. In 1971, a British Council Fellowship took him to the Department of Biophysics of University College London to work with Bernard Katz (1911-2003). In 1974, he obtained his Ph.D. from the University of Goettingen and, with Erwin Neher (b. 1944) at the Max Planck Institute for Biophysical Chemistry, began work that would transform cellular biology and neuroscience, resulting in the 1991 Nobel Prize for Physiology or Medicine. In 2008, Dr. Sakmann returned to Munich, where he headed the research group \"Cortical Columns in Silico\" at the Max Planck Institute of Neurobiology in Martinsried. Here, their group discovered the cell-type specific sensory activation patterns in different layers of a column in the vibrissal area of rodents' somatosensory cortices.</p>","PeriodicalId":49997,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the History of the Neurosciences","volume":"32 2","pages":"198-217"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2023-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/0964704X.2021.1898903","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"9430863","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-04-01DOI: 10.1080/0964704X.2023.2182090
Frank W Stahnisch
The development of the brain sciences (Hirnforschung) in the Max Planck Society (MPG) during the early decades of the Federal Republic of Germany (FRG) was influenced by the legacy of its precursor institution, the Kaiser Wilhelm Society for the Advancement of Science (KWG). The KWG's brain science institutes, along with their intramural psychiatry and neurology research programs, were of considerable interest to the Western Allies and former administrators of the German science and education systems in their plans to rebuild the extra-university research society-first in the British Occupation Zone and later in the American and French Occupation Zones. This formation process occurred under the physicist Max Planck (1858-1947) as acting president, and the MPG was named in his honor when it was formally established in 1948. In comparison to other international developments in the brain sciences, it was neuropathology as well as neurohistology that initially dominated postwar brain research activities in West Germany. In regard to its KWG past, at least four historical factors can be identified that explain the dislocated structural and social features of the MPG during the postwar period: first, the disruption of previously existing interactions between German brain scientists and international colleagues; second, the German educational structures that countered interdisciplinary developments through their structural focus on medical research disciplines during the postwar period; third, the moral misconduct of earlier KWG scientists and scholars during the National Socialism period; and, fourth, the deep rupture that appeared through the forced migration of many Jewish and oppositional neuroscientists who sought to find exile after 1933 in countries where they had already held active collaborations since the 1910s and 1920s. This article examines several trends in the MPG's disrupted relational processes as it sought to grapple with its broken past, beginning with the period of reinauguration of relevant Max Planck Institutes in brain science and culminating with the establishment of the Presidential Research Program on the History of the Kaiser Wilhelm Society in National Socialism in 1997.
{"title":"Neuroscience research in the Max Planck Society and a broken relationship to the past: Some legacies of the Kaiser Wilhelm Society after 1948.","authors":"Frank W Stahnisch","doi":"10.1080/0964704X.2023.2182090","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/0964704X.2023.2182090","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The development of the brain sciences (<i>Hirnforschung</i>) in the Max Planck Society (MPG) during the early decades of the Federal Republic of Germany (FRG) was influenced by the legacy of its precursor institution, the Kaiser Wilhelm Society for the Advancement of Science (KWG). The KWG's brain science institutes, along with their intramural psychiatry and neurology research programs, were of considerable interest to the Western Allies and former administrators of the German science and education systems in their plans to rebuild the extra-university research society-first in the British Occupation Zone and later in the American and French Occupation Zones. This formation process occurred under the physicist Max Planck (1858-1947) as acting president, and the MPG was named in his honor when it was formally established in 1948. In comparison to other international developments in the brain sciences, it was neuropathology as well as neurohistology that initially dominated postwar brain research activities in West Germany. In regard to its KWG past, at least four historical factors can be identified that explain the dislocated structural and social features of the MPG during the postwar period: first, the disruption of previously existing interactions between German brain scientists and international colleagues; second, the German educational structures that countered interdisciplinary developments through their structural focus on medical research disciplines during the postwar period; third, the moral misconduct of earlier KWG scientists and scholars during the National Socialism period; and, fourth, the deep rupture that appeared through the forced migration of many Jewish and oppositional neuroscientists who sought to find exile after 1933 in countries where they had already held active collaborations since the 1910s and 1920s. This article examines several trends in the MPG's disrupted relational processes as it sought to grapple with its broken past, beginning with the period of reinauguration of relevant Max Planck Institutes in brain science and culminating with the establishment of the Presidential Research Program on the History of the Kaiser Wilhelm Society in National Socialism in 1997.</p>","PeriodicalId":49997,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the History of the Neurosciences","volume":"32 2","pages":"81-122"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2023-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"9420886","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}