说明精神错乱:艾伦·麦克莱恩·汉密尔顿,精神错乱的类型,以及19世纪晚期美国医学的面相学。

IF 0.3 3区 哲学 Q3 HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE
Sebastian C Galbo, Keith C Mages
{"title":"说明精神错乱:艾伦·麦克莱恩·汉密尔顿,精神错乱的类型,以及19世纪晚期美国医学的面相学。","authors":"Sebastian C Galbo,&nbsp;Keith C Mages","doi":"10.1080/0964704X.2022.2162343","DOIUrl":null,"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":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Illustrating insanity: Allan McLane Hamilton, <i>Types of Insanity</i>, and physiognomy in late nineteenth-century American medicine.\",\"authors\":\"Sebastian C Galbo,&nbsp;Keith C Mages\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/0964704X.2022.2162343\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"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\":0.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of the History of the Neurosciences\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/0964704X.2022.2162343\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"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.2022.2162343","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文考察了美国精神病学家和神经学家亚历山大·麦克莱恩·汉密尔顿的面相学出版物《精神错乱的类型》(1883)的分歧接受史。通过分析19世纪晚期医学期刊上发表的23篇书评,作者提出了一个书目案例研究,追溯了专业人士对汉密尔顿作品的不同反应,从而揭示了美国医学界面相学令人担忧的本质。实际上,作者认为,期刊审稿人之间出现的跨专业分歧表明,精神病学家和神经学家为了专业化的利益而反对面相学的初步努力。由此引申,作者强调了书评和接受文学的历史价值。书评常常被认为是昙花一现,但它记录了一个时代读者的意识形态、气质和态度的变化。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Illustrating insanity: Allan McLane Hamilton, Types of Insanity, and physiognomy in late nineteenth-century American medicine.

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.

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.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信