Studium (Rotterdam, Netherlands)最新文献

Historians of science have taken leave of finalism. No longer do they write teleological histories of scientific progress. Instead of a grand narrative on the triumph of science they now tend to write small stories on local knowledge. This is the result of several decades of criticism of Whig history. Starting with neo-marxist critique in the interwar years, enhanced in the social history of the 1970s, science was seen as an economic commodity and as a social product. Cultural history and anthropology added the view that scientists and scholars are mere mortals, muddling through messy life. This critique was topped off with postmodern criticism of knowledge as power, which translates into the accusation that historiography is only legitimating cultural and political oppression. To counter these allegations, many historians have insulated themselves into a kind of retro-historicism that shies away from any teleology, coherence, meaning and evaluation. It depicts the production of knowledge as a practical, local activity that is strictly limited to its cultural context. No claims to truth, validity, let alone progress or even development were allowed. This situation of rampant relativism could not last. Total abstinence of any evaluation of knowledge claims, quality of research or success of theories has proven unsatisfactory. The need has arisen to study broader issues of traveling knowledge and longer lines of scientific development. There is a shift of interest into traditions of knowledge that spring the bonds of locality and context. Why do some scientific theories and research practices succeed in surpassing paradigms and bridging epistemic ruptures? In this respect disciplines are in the process of being rehabilitated. Instead of oppressive structures they become the vehicles of sustained knowledge growth. Especially the role of education and academic training is focused on. Facing up to the charges of conceptual anachronism, historians of knowledge now opt for a cautiously evaluative history. The alternative would be an intellectually barren historicism.

Most scientific disciplines, such as chemistry, biology and physics, are now about two centuries old. Using physics as a case study the present paper aims to account for this longevity. What kept the physics discipline together from the early nineteenth century onwards? Literature on the rise of physics suggests that the discipline was formed around energy, the ether, or other theoretical notions. Yet the twentieth-century revolutions in physics showed that the discipline could prosper without some of its most 'fundamental' concepts. Some scholars conclude that internal factors are therefore irrelevant and disciplinary identity and continuity are purely institutional. Drawing on the work of Thomas Kuhn, Peter Galison and Andrew Warwick, this paper defends a different point of view. Although there is no intellectual core of disciplines, the prolonged existence of disciplines cannot be explained without some degree of internal continuity. If there is a revolution of a theoretical level, there may still be continuity on the level of experimental practices (and vice versa). It is this flexibility that accounts for the fact that disciplines may adapt to different circumstances. In addition, an educational tradition is required to transmit knowledge from one generation to the next.

The Journal tenu par Isaac Beeckman de 1604 à 1634 has been studied in the history of the seventeenth-century scientific revolution following the theme of Isaac Beeckman's physical mathematical mechanistic view, his proto-molecular theory and his atomistic Lucretian influence. This article goes deeper into the medical ideas of the Journal: how Isaac Beeckman (1588-1637) settles the structure of living matter according to his intensive reading of Galen. It develops a different analysis from the traditionally triumphalist approach in the history of science, focused on the victory of Cartesian mechanism, particularly in the history of medicine taking up Galenism very briefly because of its obsolete physiology. The Galenic corpus inside Isaac Beeckman's Journal consists of the many commentaries of Galen which Beeckman has put down in writing since 1616 until 1627, after when the passages linked to Galen became fewer. Isaac Beeckman's study of Galenic medicine is analyzed according to three approaches: the teleological dimension of Galenism showing up the organic conception of human body corresponding to the divine Providence and consistent with Beeckman's Calvinist belief, the physiologic angle of Galenism, based on natural faculties, stressing the purely speculative aspect of Beeckman's commentaries, while the pathologic and therapeutic angle supports the Hippocratic humourism influence.

The start of discipline formation in the 'national philologies' (such as 'English language and literature', 'Germanistik', etc.) is often considered to have taken place around the middle of the nineteenth century. At that time, the German philological school of scholars such as Jacob Grimm gained influence at universities all over Europe. Meticulous analysis of the oldest (medieval) texts, as well as rigorous application of the methods of historical-comparative linguistics in editing these texts, became the norm and the nec plus ultra of philology. Other forms of academic and scholarly attention to national literature--e.g., the study of the history of literature in post-medieval and modern times--were from then on looked down upon as mere hobbies, made obsolete by the 'modern', 'truly scientific' methods of the German school. The case of the 'national philologies' thus seems to corroborate the common idea that discipline formation in science consists mainly of a process of specialization and differentiation. However, an overview of the history of 'Neerlandistiek' (the academic study of Dutch language and literature) over the course of the nineteenth century suggests that the success of German School's methods was in fact but a temporary episode. In the history of 'national philologies' such as the 'Neerlandistiek', episodes of specialization seem to alternate with episodes in which the main emphasis is not on specialization but on extension of the scope, on integration of elements from other disciplines, and on reinforcement of the ties with social institutions such as the education system. Interdisciplinarity is not a new phenomenon but can already be found in the days of the discipline's origin in Holland. Back then, the first professors of 'Dutch rhetorics' around 1800 rapidly expanded their specialist studies into the study of 'Dutch language and literature' in the broadest possible sense. Phenomena such as these seem to apply more generally to the process of discipline formation in the humanities. The fact that disciplines such as the 'national philologies' still exist, suggests that specialization, differentiation and 'boundary wars' are not the only road to scientific legitimacy. Extension of the scope, (re)unification with other disciplines and intense communication with social systems inside and outside university are at least as important.

The anthropological approach was one of the new approaches to psychiatry that emerged in the interbellum. In The Netherlands professor Van der Horst (VU-university Amsterdam and the municipal University of Amsterdam) was its most prominent proponent. The general idea of the anthropological approach was to integrate the various ways of knowing then available. A psychiatric disease was seen as the result of a failure in the self-realisation of the individual person. This required to consider all relevant aspects relating to the patient's existence. How to tailor these ideas to concrete forms of diagnosis and methods of treatment was no easy matter and Van der Horst devoted himself all his life to this task. He first sought to classify man in three or four types of character inspired by the works of Heymans and Kretschmer. Then he tried to give the specific human aspect its place in psychiatry by introducing a 'pneumatic' dimension in his analysis of persons. He also connected this dimension to Calvinism, the church he belonged to. In the 1940's he made a turn towards existentialism and tried to connect this philosophy to anthropological psychiatry. In spite of its fragmentary appearance I believe it is possible to discern a degree of continuity in the work of Van der Horst. The concern with the specifically human was always central to him. Moreover Van der Horst saw no strict divide between addressing questions in psychiatry and thinking about the greater questions of life which provides an explanation for his meandering thoughts. The dissertation of J.H. van den Berg which appeared in 1946 offers an interesting contrast to Van der Horst. To Van den Berg the anthropological approach was no more than a method best developed by Binswanger. Van den Berg tested this method and concluded that the approach could offer hermeneutic insights at points where methods of the natural sciences fell short. These restrictions had the sake of clarity. In stark contrast, and in spite of all his efforts, many aspects in the work of Van der Horst remained obscure. However his search for an overarching anthropological approach to psychiatry is still interesting to us because it questions what the borders of the field actually are. Since the various approaches to psychiatry are still at best loosely integrated this question is of continuing relevance.

In this article we explore the historical development of drug advertisements for psychotropic drugs in the leading Dutch medical journal from 1900 to 1940. The advertisements for hypnotics and sedatives, in The Nederlands Tijdschrift voor Geneeskunde (Dutch medical journal) reflected the changes in the vocabulary and image promoted by the pharmaceutical companies. In the first two decades, the advertisements were sober and to the point, and included the trademark, company name, molecular formula and therapeutic properties of the medication. The emphasis was on creating a scientific image of reliable symptom control for the therapeutic drug. In doing so, the ethical drug companies tried (successfully) to distinguish themselves from the producers of patent medicines. Once scientific credibility was established, the form and content of the advertisements changed significantly. In the late 1920s and 1930s drug companies embraced modern advertising techniques, developing a figurative language to address the changing beliefs and practices of Dutch physicians. Instead of promoting therapeutic drugs as safe and scientific, the emphasis was on their effectiveness in comparison to similar drugs. In the process, scientific information was reduced to an indispensable standardized minimum, whereby therapeutic drugs were advertised according to the latest pharmacological taxonomy rather than molecular formulas. The image-making of 'ethical marketing' began during the interwar years when marketers applied modern advertising techniques and infotainment strategies. The scanty black and white informational bulletins transitioned into colourful advertisements. The pharmaceutical companies employed the same medical language as used by physicians, so that one word or image in an advertisement would suffice for the physician to recognize a drug and its therapeutic properties. These developments show the changing relationship between the modern ethical pharmaceutical industry and Dutch doctors during the interwar years--from rapprochement towards concerted action.

The discovery of vitamins at the start of the 20th century not only stimulated new areas of scientific research in the field of nutrition and pharmacy; vitamins also turned out to be profitable products for new or existing industries. Consequently, vitamins drove scientists and commercial vitamin producers into each others' arms during the first decades of the century. Several publications--by Harmke Kamminga and Sally Horrocks for instance--deal with the causes and effects of forms of co-operation between science and industry in the nutritional and pharmaceutical sector. They mostly stress--using examples from Great-Britain--the interconnected interests from which both profited: industry-sponsored vitamin research made vitamins available to a larger public of consumers, with scientists authorizing the health claims of the products these companies tried to sell. This article shows how Dutch scientists and vitamin producers were concerned with the same issue in the inter-war period. Not only does it focus on the interconnected interests, but particularly on the conflicts of interests scientists were experiencing whilst performing advisory or research work for the industry. The article singles out E.J.J. Buytendijk, nowadays remembered for his pioneering research in the field of phenomenological psychology after the Second World War, and his involvement with the Swiss vitamin preparation Eviunis at the end of the nineteen-twenties. Buytendijk actively promoted the introduction of this particular preparation on the Dutch market. He was confronted with a growing number of critics, however, after tests demonstrated how the preparation could hardly sustain any of the claims that had been made with regard to its vitamin-like performance. Buytendijk's strongest critics accused him of misusing his scientific authority to sell a fraudulent product--after all, he that maintained his own tests had confirmed Eviunis' claims. A final, state-ordered counter test of Eviunis resulted in the ban of the preparation from the Dutch market. However, it did not condemn Buytendijks commitment to the product. It only concluded that the physiologist had been mistaken in his interpretation of the working of Eviunis. Buytendijk's reputation as a vitamin researcher compromised nonetheless, because of his spirited commitment to a product that turned out to sell an illusion.

According to a widespread interpretation, the history of psychiatry is characterized by a strong opposition between biological and psychological paradigms, which would dominate consecutive periods in history. The image of a swinging pendulum is a popular metaphor to describe this idea. The culture of Dutch psychiatry in the interwar years (1918-1940) seems to gainsay this image. Psychological, biological and socials models of explanation and therapy were used alongside each other without apparent debate and conflict. Influential professors of psychiatry like H.C. Rümke (Utrecht University) even pleaded for a conscious integration of these approaches. Some historians have interpreted this stance as a sign of scientific 'vagueness' and 'anarchy'. Analyzing the work of three major representatives of Dutch psychiatry in the Interbellum (Leendert Bouman, Han Rümke and Lammert van der Horst), the authors (former students of the master Historical and Comparative Studies of the Sciences and the Humanities) shed light on the psychiatric climate of this era, dealing with themes like the openness of psychiatry to other sciences, the interactions of psychiatry and literature, and the relationship between theory and clinical practice. As a result a further qualification of the image of the pendulum is argued for.

In recent historical literature, the Dutch psychiatrist Leendert Bouman (1869-1936) is named 'the godfather of psychological psychiatry'. He is regarded as one of the exponents of a shift or 'pendulum' movement from a biological-materialistic to a psychological, phenomenological orientation in the Dutch psychiatry of the Interbellum. As a professor of the orthodox calvinist Vrije Universiteit of Amsterdam, he explicitly opposed a 'soul-less', biological-reductionist psychiatry. In addition, he played an important part in the introduction and spread of new'psychological' theories and especially Karl Jaspers' phenomenology in The Netherlands. It is one-sided and misleading, however, to refer to Bouman as a 'psychological' psychiatrist. Most of his scientific work was of a neurological and biological nature. He did not see biological (or nomothetic) and psychological (or idiographic) approaches as mutually exclusive, but as necessarily complementary. In this he followed Jaspers' distinction between and complementary use of the causal connections of psychic life (explanatory psychology) and meaningful psychic connections (psychology of meaning). Boumans pluralist orientation was rooted in his fundamentally clinical attitude toward psychiatry. In his view, a psychiatrist was in the first place a clinician. In the clinic, he stressed, a psychiatrist has to view and examine each individual patient in his bio-psycho-social totality. The case of Bouman illustrates that the history of psychiatry is by far richer and more complicated than is suggested by the standard account of that history being characterized by a pendulum movement and a one-dimensional struggle between 'somatic' and 'psychological' schools. It also suggests that the interaction between theory and clinical practice should be emphasized as an important dynamic factor in the history of psychiatry--next to or even above the dichotomy between 'biology' and 'psychology'.