Wassmann Claudia
J Hist Behav Sci. 2014 Spring;50(2):166-88. doi: 10.1002/jhbs.21651. Epub 2014 Mar 10.
William James is the name that comes to mind when asked about scientific explanations of emotion in the nineteenth century. However, strictly speaking James's theory of emotion does not explain emotions and never did. Indeed, James contemporaries pointed this out already more than a hundred years ago. Why could "James' theory" nevertheless become a landmark that psychologists, neuroscientists, and historians alike refer to today? The strong focus on James and Anglo-American sources in historiography has overshadowed all other answers given to the question of emotion at the time of James. For that reason, the article returns to the primary sources and places James's work back into the context of nineteenth century brain research in which it developed.
当被问及19世纪对情绪的科学解释时,人们首先想到的名字是威廉·詹姆斯。然而,严格来说,詹姆斯的情绪理论并没有也从未解释过情绪。事实上,早在一百多年前,詹姆斯的同时代人就指出了这一点。那么,为什么“詹姆斯理论”至今仍能成为心理学家、神经科学家和历史学家都提及的一个里程碑呢?史学界对詹姆斯及英美资料的强烈关注,掩盖了当时针对情绪问题给出的所有其他答案。因此,本文回归原始资料,将詹姆斯的著作放回其得以发展的19世纪大脑研究的背景中。