Journal of the History of the Neurosciences最新文献

{"title":"How did Johann Christian Reil feel the insular cortex? <i>Gemeingefühl</i> as a seat of mind.","authors":"Michiaki Nagai, Satoshi Kato","doi":"10.1080/0964704X.2025.2495948","DOIUrl":"10.1080/0964704X.2025.2495948","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Johann Christian Reil was the first to coin the term \"psychiatry\" in 1808, prior to that he had proposed <i>Gemeingefühl</i> (<i>coenaesthesis</i>), which is interpreted as referring to the integrated information of all senses and emotions. On the other hand, in 1809, Reil formally described the insular cortex as <i>die Insel</i> and considered the insular cortex to serve as the pedestal of mental activity. The background to Reil's research had been the social, religious, cultural, and political context of social upheaval in Europe at the time, particularly in Germany and France, which had a major impact on the academic and medical systems he advocated. For over 200 years, the relationship between <i>Gemeingefühl</i> and the insular cortex has remained a mystery. However, recent neuroimaging studies are beginning to shed light on the function of the insular cortex. This article provides an overview of Reil's life as reported to date and summarizes Reil's achievements in medicine from the perspectives of physiology, neuroanatomy, and psychiatry. Furthermore, we interpreted the <i>Gemeingefühl</i> as proposed by Reil in relation to <i>gemeinsinn</i> (<i>sensus communis</i>) and common sense, and provide a perspective on the role of the insular cortex as a seat of the mind, society and culture.</p>","PeriodicalId":49997,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the History of the Neurosciences","volume":" ","pages":"1-17"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2025-05-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144005113","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}

{"title":"Evaluating evidence for the cortical localization for language: Systematic reviews in the 1860s and 1870s.","authors":"Marjorie Lorch","doi":"10.1080/0964704X.2025.2487419","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/0964704X.2025.2487419","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The specialization of cortical function for language was proposed by Paul Broca (1824-1880) in 1861 and further elaborated to include the principle of hemispheric lateralization in 1865. Broca and other French colleagues argued for and against these hypotheses, employing clinical and pathological observations of individuals with acquired language disorders as evidence. These ideas became a topic of widespread interest after the debates at the Paris Academy of Medicine in 1865 were reported internationally. During this period until the end of the decade, hundreds of publications appeared on the localization and laterality of findings in aphasic individuals and case series. Several large-scale systematic reviews of historic (pre-1861) and contemporary (post-1861) clinical findings were published only a few years after the syndrome had been proposed. These aimed to determine the strength and quality of evidence regarding the specialization and lateralization of brain areas for language. However, their authors held distinct theoretical assumptions and ideological concerns and were motivated by varied research questions. These comprehensive efforts using systematic review methodology to assess the evidence for and against hypotheses about the organization of language in the brain are examined to expose the issues of live debate in early neuroscience.</p>","PeriodicalId":49997,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the History of the Neurosciences","volume":" ","pages":"1-18"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2025-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144051282","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}

{"title":"In memoriam Robert Barry Daroff, M.D. (1936-2025).","authors":"Douglas J Lanska","doi":"10.1080/0964704X.2025.2492083","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/0964704X.2025.2492083","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Robert Daroff (1936-2025) was one of the most influential neurologists of the late-twentieth and early-twenty-first centuries. Following education at Ivy League research universities, Daroff was the first U.S. neurologist to serve in a frontline combat unit during the Vietnam war. Subsequently, when neuro-ophthalmology was <i>exclusively</i> an ophthalmology subspecialty, Daroff pioneered neuro-ophthalmology as a subspecialty of neurology, training with neuro-ophthalmologists Lawton Smith and William Hoyt. Daroff then established his own pioneering Ocular Motor Laboratory in Miami in conjunction with Louis Dell'Osso. Daroff introduced the simultaneous binocular recording of each eye separately, allowing identification of dysmetria in normal and diseased individuals, and ultimately measurement and modeling of pathology in the pursuit and saccadic systems. After his appointment as neurology chairman at Case Western Reserve University in Cleveland (1980), he became a national and international leader in neurology, making fundamental contributions to neurologic education and oversight of scientific integrity, and the subdisciplines of neuro-ophthalmology, headache, and neurotology. As Editor-in-Chief of <i>Neurology</i>, Daroff garnered national recognition for boldly addressing allegations of scientific misconduct. Although holding many high-profile roles, including as president of both the American Neurological Association and the American Headache Society, Daroff considered his greatest medical legacy to be the residents he trained.</p>","PeriodicalId":49997,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the History of the Neurosciences","volume":" ","pages":"1-48"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2025-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144062955","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}

{"title":"Jean-Martin Charcot, member of thesis juries at the Paris Medical School (1862-1893).","authors":"Olivier Walusinski","doi":"10.1080/0964704X.2024.2344418","DOIUrl":"10.1080/0964704X.2024.2344418","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Jean-Martin Charcot is considered the founding father of modern neurology. There are many general and specialized biographies about him, the result being that a new text is unexpected or would likely amount to plagiarism. However, part of the duties for Charcot's medical professorship have not, to date, been studied at all. This article will focus on the role of Charcot as a member of doctorate juries and, in particular, as the president of these juries. I have reviewed around 12,500 theses one by one. These were defended at the Paris medical school from 1862, Charcot's first year as an <i>agrégé</i> (assistant professor), to his death in 1893. Among the theses, I have selected all of those that discuss neuropsychiatry in the broadest terms (3,663). I have paid particular attention to all of those for which Charcot was part of the jury. This involves 608 theses. All of the data were entered in a database (Filemaker) to facilitate identifying those theses corresponding to one or more of the criteria. Statistical comparisons were then carried out (Excel spreadsheet). In addition to these results, brief individualized surveys were conducted on theses selected for their representativeness, either for the subject matter (multiple sclerosis, aphasia, tabes, general paralysis, etc.) or for specific criteria (foreigners, women, etc.), but all of the theses were defended before a jury that included Charcot. This makes it possible to track how the areas of study in the medical world changed over time, and particularly those of Charcot. The juries Charcot was obliged to be a part of, without any particular ties to the candidate and/or any involvement in the selection and supervision of the work, must be differentiated from the thesis juries for his students. In the latter case, the thesis subjects were most often linked to Charcot's researches. Providing a thesis subject was motivated, in certain cases, by the desire to disseminate new data in the medical profession, not only by dint of the theses themselves but also through the reports that the medical press published regularly (e.g. the diagnosis of various types of shaking) and through the commercial publication of these data, in some cases with a preface by Charcot. In other cases, the thesis was a step in the long process of developing a theory (hysteria). Or it led to a flowering of new ideas, insufficiently proven, which Charcot would only cover in his <i>Lessons</i> once there was convincing confirmation (amyotrophy). This rich cornucopia gives rise to certain neglected nuggets, as well as works that have entered the classical corpus-for example, the theses of Léopold Ordenstein, Ivan Poumeau, Isaac Bruhl, Albert Gombault, and Pierre Janet.</p>","PeriodicalId":49997,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the History of the Neurosciences","volume":" ","pages":"185-205"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2025-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141248708","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}

{"title":"Charcot's contribution to the problem of language in mental medicine.","authors":"Camille Jaccard","doi":"10.1080/0964704X.2024.2365573","DOIUrl":"10.1080/0964704X.2024.2365573","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Jean-Martin Charcot's 1883 lectures on aphasia at the Salpêtrière Hospital were seen as the starting point for the development of a psychology in the work of the famous neurologist. In his lectures, Charcot set out a theory of language function at the cerebral level, distinguishing between the different centers involved in speech production and those necessary for reading. His lectures, which also postulated the independence of ideas from words, were to resonate beyond aphasia specialists, and particularly with alienists. To document this dimension of the reception of neurology in the field of psychiatry, this article refers to Jules Séglas's synthesis on <i>Les troubles du langage chez les aliénés</i>, published in 1892, which summarized the knowledge acquired during the nineteenth century about modifications of expression in madness and whose original ideas were to mark the psychiatric semiology of the early-twentieth century. The analysis details how Séglas cited and adapted Charcot's conceptions to explain the production of incomprehensible speech in idiocy and the formation of hallucinations, thus contributing to the spread of the neurologist's model among his fellow alienists.</p>","PeriodicalId":49997,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the History of the Neurosciences","volume":" ","pages":"143-153"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2025-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141601996","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}

{"title":"Charcot and the psychology of hysteria, with special reference to a never published final case history.","authors":"Toby Gelfand","doi":"10.1080/0964704X.2024.2353000","DOIUrl":"10.1080/0964704X.2024.2353000","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Jean-Martin Charcot is perhaps best remembered for his contributions to organic neurology. However, his pursuit of hysteria, the most prevalent diagnosis in his hospital clinic, yielded no anatomical lesion to account for hysteria's plethora of somatic disorders assumed due to a purely functional or <i>dynamic</i> lesion in the cerebral cortex. This led Charcot to turn his attention to the psychology of hysteria. Taking advantage of institutional reforms at the Salpêtrière-notably, the establishment of his professorship in nervous diseases-Charcot from the early 1880s focused his teaching increasingly on case histories of hysteria in male as well as female patients. Already renown for his earlier dramatic public lessons on female hysteria, his lessons of the 1880s, of which two volumes were published at the end of the decade, elaborated the issue of psychology in terms of altered states of patient's suggestibility. By the decade's end, Charcot's worldwide reputation rested on the prospects of this work as acknowledged by numerous students, notably medical psychologists Pierre Janet and Sigmund Freud. Yet Charcot's views remained sketchy. They were discussed at length in his unpublished notes for a lesson intended for May 1893, just a few months before his sudden death. His unpublished notes reveal a detailed case for dreams as illustrating a psychological mechanism underlying hysteria in a 17-year-old Paris artisan. I conclude by considering why this significant climactic case of Charcot's might have been overlooked by his entourage.</p>","PeriodicalId":49997,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the History of the Neurosciences","volume":" ","pages":"263-273"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2025-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142074400","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}

{"title":"Charcot and Léon Daudet: A missed love story?","authors":"Julien Bogousslavsky, Laurent Tatu","doi":"10.1080/0964704X.2024.2372240","DOIUrl":"10.1080/0964704X.2024.2372240","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Biographies, articles, and meetings devoted to the founder of modern neurology, Jean-Martin Charcot, are typically dithyrambic, if not hagiographic. It seems that the striking professional and familial qualities of Charcot have erased any other characteristic of the person, and scratches on the Master image commonly have not been well accepted. With this in mind, it is interesting to present and evaluate the rather negative opinions on Charcot by the famous French writer Léon Daudet, who initially was very close to the Charcots through his father, Alphonse Daudet, and who wrote rather extensively on Charcot in his diary and memoirs. Our point is not to underline these writings as the \"truth\" about Charcot's personality and life (Daudet, who was a prominent extreme right-wing figure, was known to exaggerate and play with his sharp opinions), but Daudet's criticisms paradoxically provide a fascinating perspective, which may help to reconstruct better who Charcot really was in counterbalancing a bit the overcrowded, politically correct, praising group.</p>","PeriodicalId":49997,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the History of the Neurosciences","volume":" ","pages":"322-330"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2025-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141601995","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}

{"title":"Malcolm Bruce Macmillan (1929-2024).","authors":"Nicholas J Wade","doi":"10.1080/0964704X.2025.2452242","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/0964704X.2025.2452242","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":49997,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the History of the Neurosciences","volume":"34 2","pages":"439-442"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2025-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144023780","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}

{"title":"Edvard Munch's crisis in 1908 and French medicine: His doctors, treatments, and sources of information.","authors":"Stanley Finger, Elisabetta Sirgiovanni","doi":"10.1080/0964704X.2024.2357059","DOIUrl":"10.1080/0964704X.2024.2357059","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In 1908, Norwegian artist Edvard Munch-already famous for <i>The Scream</i> and other paintings showing sickness, despair, and suffering-put himself under the care of Dr. Daniel Jacobson, a nerve doctor in Copenhagen. Jacobson had previously attended some of Jean-Martin Charcot's lectures in Paris, as had Knud Pontoppidan, his mentor. Munch, in turn, had long been showing signs and symptoms of an anxiety disorder and what might have been viewed as neurasthenia or hysteria. Now, he also seemed to be suffering from acute alcoholic toxicity. In this article, we explore Scandinavian psychiatry at the turn of the century; Jacobson and Pontoppidan's connections to Paris; and how some of Munch's treatments, most notably his electrotherapy sessions, related to therapeutics at La Salpêtrière. Additionally, various ways in which Munch learned about French medicine are examined. This material reveals how well-known and influential Charcot and his ideas about disorders of the brain and mind had become at the turn of the century, affecting not just the French physicians but also a world-famous artist and his nerve doctor in Scandinavia.</p>","PeriodicalId":49997,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the History of the Neurosciences","volume":" ","pages":"331-354"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2025-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141421679","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}

{"title":"Scientific plurality and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS): A philosophical and historical perspective on Charcot's texts.","authors":"Anne Fenoy","doi":"10.1080/0964704X.2024.2380635","DOIUrl":"10.1080/0964704X.2024.2380635","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The history of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS)-also known as Charcot's disease, Lou Gehrig's disease, and motor neuron disease (MND)-freezes the texts of the scientist and physician Jean-Martin Charcot in a hagiographic narrative describing a brilliant discovery, based on the anatomo-clinical method. This narrative is often used by biologists and physicians as a reference point. This article shows that the use of the hagiographic register faces limitations. In particular, it obscures points of interest from Charcot's texts on ALS, such as the epistemological and ontological implications of scientific plurality in medicine. Although Charcot recognized the importance of scientific plurality in medicine, he prioritized the approaches and conferred the most important epistemic authority on clinical and pathological observations. In his view, animal modeling remains secondary to the understanding of disease. The concept of ALS and its diagnostic operability are the result of symptoms and lesions. By studying the past, we can highlight the specific features of the present. Today, although the ALS concept retains its diagnostic and clinical relevance, it is increasingly called into question in etiological and mechanistic research. Despite these differences, Charcot's reflections are a reminder of the importance of theoretical thinking on scientific plurality, all the more so today in the context of ALS research, in which combining different approaches is increasingly valued to understand the phenotypic and genetic heterogeneity of ALS.</p>","PeriodicalId":49997,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the History of the Neurosciences","volume":" ","pages":"133-142"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2025-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142005704","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}