中世纪细胞学说:1490年至1630年间印刷书籍中的基础、发展、演变和图形表示。

IF 0.3 3区 哲学 Q3 HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE Journal of the History of the Neurosciences Pub Date : 2022-04-01 Epub Date: 2021-11-02 DOI:10.1080/0964704X.2021.1972702
Douglas J Lanska
{"title":"中世纪细胞学说:1490年至1630年间印刷书籍中的基础、发展、演变和图形表示。","authors":"Douglas J Lanska","doi":"10.1080/0964704X.2021.1972702","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The medieval cell doctrine was a series of related psychological models based on ancient Greco-Roman ideas in which cognitive faculties were assigned to \"cells,\" typically corresponding to the cerebral ventricles. During Late Antiquity and continuing during the Early Middle Ages, Christian philosophers attempted to reinterpret Aristotle's <i>De Anima</i>, along with later modifications by Herophilos and Galen, in a manner consistent with religious doctrine. The resulting medieval cell doctrine was formulated by the fathers of the early Christian Church in the fourth and fifth centuries. Printed images of the doctrine that appeared in medical, philosophical, and religious works, beginning with \"graphic incunabula\" at the end of the fifteenth century, extended and evolved a manuscript tradition that had been in place since at least the eleventh century. Some of these early psychological models just pigeonholed the various cognitive faculties in different non-overlapping bins within the brain (albeit without any clinicopathologic evidence supporting such localizations), while others specifically promoted or implied a linear sequence of events, resembling the process of digestion. By the sixteenth century, printed images of the doctrine were usually linear three-cell versions with few exceptions having four or five cells. Despite direct challenges by Massa and Vesalius in the sixteenth century, and Willis in the seventeenth century, the doctrine saw its most elaborate formulations in the late-sixteenth and early-seventeenth centuries with illustrations by the Paracelsan physicians Bacci and Fludd. Overthrow of the doctrine had to await abandonment of Galenic cardiovascular physiology from the late-seventeenth to early-eighteenth centuries.</p>","PeriodicalId":49997,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the History of the Neurosciences","volume":"31 2-3","pages":"115-175"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2022-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The medieval cell doctrine: Foundations, development, evolution, and graphic representations in printed books from 1490 to 1630.\",\"authors\":\"Douglas J Lanska\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/0964704X.2021.1972702\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The medieval cell doctrine was a series of related psychological models based on ancient Greco-Roman ideas in which cognitive faculties were assigned to \\\"cells,\\\" typically corresponding to the cerebral ventricles. During Late Antiquity and continuing during the Early Middle Ages, Christian philosophers attempted to reinterpret Aristotle's <i>De Anima</i>, along with later modifications by Herophilos and Galen, in a manner consistent with religious doctrine. The resulting medieval cell doctrine was formulated by the fathers of the early Christian Church in the fourth and fifth centuries. Printed images of the doctrine that appeared in medical, philosophical, and religious works, beginning with \\\"graphic incunabula\\\" at the end of the fifteenth century, extended and evolved a manuscript tradition that had been in place since at least the eleventh century. Some of these early psychological models just pigeonholed the various cognitive faculties in different non-overlapping bins within the brain (albeit without any clinicopathologic evidence supporting such localizations), while others specifically promoted or implied a linear sequence of events, resembling the process of digestion. By the sixteenth century, printed images of the doctrine were usually linear three-cell versions with few exceptions having four or five cells. Despite direct challenges by Massa and Vesalius in the sixteenth century, and Willis in the seventeenth century, the doctrine saw its most elaborate formulations in the late-sixteenth and early-seventeenth centuries with illustrations by the Paracelsan physicians Bacci and Fludd. Overthrow of the doctrine had to await abandonment of Galenic cardiovascular physiology from the late-seventeenth to early-eighteenth centuries.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49997,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of the History of the Neurosciences\",\"volume\":\"31 2-3\",\"pages\":\"115-175\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of the History of the Neurosciences\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/0964704X.2021.1972702\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2021/11/2 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the History of the Neurosciences","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/0964704X.2021.1972702","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/11/2 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

中世纪细胞学说是基于古希腊罗马思想的一系列相关的心理学模型,其中认知能力被分配给“细胞”,通常与脑室相对应。在古代晚期和中世纪早期,基督教哲学家试图重新解释亚里士多德的《论阿尼玛》,以及后来由希罗菲洛斯和盖伦修改的《论阿尼玛》,以一种与宗教教义一致的方式。由此产生的中世纪细胞学说是由早期基督教会的教父们在四世纪和五世纪制定的。在医学、哲学和宗教著作中出现的教义的印刷图像,从15世纪末的“graphic incunabula”开始,扩展和发展了至少从11世纪就存在的手稿传统。一些早期的心理学模型只是将不同的认知能力归类于大脑中不同的不重叠的箱子中(尽管没有任何临床病理证据支持这种定位),而另一些模型则特别促进或暗示了一个线性序列的事件,类似于消化过程。到了16世纪,教义的印刷图像通常是线性的三格版本,很少有四格或五格的例外。尽管马萨和维萨里在16世纪,威利斯在17世纪提出了直接的挑战,但在16世纪末和17世纪初,帕拉塞尔医生巴奇和弗洛德的插图,使这一教义得到了最详尽的阐述。这一学说的推翻必须等到盖伦心血管生理学从17世纪末到18世纪初被抛弃之后。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The medieval cell doctrine: Foundations, development, evolution, and graphic representations in printed books from 1490 to 1630.

The medieval cell doctrine was a series of related psychological models based on ancient Greco-Roman ideas in which cognitive faculties were assigned to "cells," typically corresponding to the cerebral ventricles. During Late Antiquity and continuing during the Early Middle Ages, Christian philosophers attempted to reinterpret Aristotle's De Anima, along with later modifications by Herophilos and Galen, in a manner consistent with religious doctrine. The resulting medieval cell doctrine was formulated by the fathers of the early Christian Church in the fourth and fifth centuries. Printed images of the doctrine that appeared in medical, philosophical, and religious works, beginning with "graphic incunabula" at the end of the fifteenth century, extended and evolved a manuscript tradition that had been in place since at least the eleventh century. Some of these early psychological models just pigeonholed the various cognitive faculties in different non-overlapping bins within the brain (albeit without any clinicopathologic evidence supporting such localizations), while others specifically promoted or implied a linear sequence of events, resembling the process of digestion. By the sixteenth century, printed images of the doctrine were usually linear three-cell versions with few exceptions having four or five cells. Despite direct challenges by Massa and Vesalius in the sixteenth century, and Willis in the seventeenth century, the doctrine saw its most elaborate formulations in the late-sixteenth and early-seventeenth centuries with illustrations by the Paracelsan physicians Bacci and Fludd. Overthrow of the doctrine had to await abandonment of Galenic cardiovascular physiology from the late-seventeenth to early-eighteenth centuries.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of the History of the Neurosciences
Journal of the History of the Neurosciences 社会科学-科学史与科学哲学
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
20.00%
发文量
55
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of the History of the Neurosciences is the leading communication platform dealing with the historical roots of the basic and applied neurosciences. Its domains cover historical perspectives and developments, including biographical studies, disorders, institutions, documents, and instrumentation in neurology, neurosurgery, neuropsychiatry, neuroanatomy, neurophysiology, neurochemistry, neuropsychology, and the behavioral neurosciences. The history of ideas, changes in society and medicine, and the connections with other disciplines (e.g., the arts, philosophy, psychology) are welcome. In addition to original, full-length papers, the journal welcomes informative short communications, letters to the editors, book reviews, and contributions to its NeuroWords and Neurognostics columns. All manuscripts are subject to initial appraisal by an Editor, and, if found suitable for further consideration, full- and short-length papers are subject to peer review (double blind, if requested) by at least 2 anonymous referees.
期刊最新文献
Charcot's interest in faith healing. António Egas Moniz: From pioneering brain imaging to controversial psychosurgery. A 150th birthday celebration. The concept of the Schwann cell by Louis Ranvier and his school: The 'interannular segment' as a cell unit. The trial of David Ferrier, November 1881: Context, proceedings, and aftermath. Henry Hun and his family: Three foundational stories in the history of nineteenth-century American neurology, Part I. Thomas Hun (1808-1896): Nineteenth-century patriarch, neurophilosopher, and proto-neurologist.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1