Kragh Helge
History of Science Department, University of Aarhus, Building 521, Ny Munkegade, 8000 Aarhus, Denmark.
J Hist Neurosci. 2002 Mar;11(1):55-62. doi: 10.1076/jhin.11.1.55.9097.
The paper focuses on historiographical questions relevant to the historical study of the neurosciences. I attempt to illuminate these questions by looking at them from the perspective of general historiography of science. In the first section, I consider the disciplinary structure of the modern neurosciences and discuss some of the historiographical problems that are involved in the historical description of a highly multidisciplinary field. For example, how far back in time can one trace brain research as part of the construction that we call the neurosciences? The main part of the paper deals with recent trends in contextualist historiography in relation to the neurosciences. I suggest that one important source for the trend, as it emerged in the 1970s, was a renewed interest in the history of phrenology and its reception in Britain. By looking at the historiography of phrenology, some of the rival positions in modern historiography of science can be illuminated. In the last part of the paper, I comment on the advantages and disadvantages of contextualist historiography of science, including its relation to the producers of science, the scientists.
本文聚焦于与神经科学历史研究相关的史学问题。我试图从科学通史的角度审视这些问题,以阐明它们。在第一部分,我考量现代神经科学的学科结构,并讨论在对一个高度多学科领域进行历史描述时所涉及的一些史学问题。例如,作为我们所称的神经科学构建的一部分,大脑研究可以追溯到多久以前?本文的主要部分探讨了情境主义史学在神经科学方面的近期趋势。我认为,该趋势在20世纪70年代出现的一个重要源头,是对颅相学历史及其在英国的接受情况重新产生的兴趣。通过审视颅相学的史学,现代科学史学中的一些对立立场可以得到阐明。在本文的最后一部分,我评论了科学情境主义史学的优缺点,包括它与科学生产者即科学家的关系。