Fuller Steve
Isis. 2014 Mar;105(1):100-9. doi: 10.1086/675552.
This essay introduces a Focus section on "Neurohistory and History of Science" by distinguishing images of the brain as governor and as transducer: the former treat the brain as the executive control center of the body, the latter as an interface between the organism and reality at large. Most of the consternation expressed in the symposium about the advent of neurohistory derives from the brain-as-governor conception, which is rooted in a "biologistic" understanding of humanity that in recent years has become bound up in various nefarious "neoliberal" political and economic agendas. However, given the sophisticated attitude that neurohistory's leading champion, Daniel Smail, displays toward evolutionary theory's potential impact on historical practice, he is perhaps better understood as part of the brain-as-transducer tradition. This tradition, largely suppressed in current representations of neuroscience, has a strong theological provenance, ultimately concerned with our becoming attuned to the divine frequency, not least by extending the powers of the human nervous system through technology. This essay sympathetically explores the implications of this perspective for historical practice.
本文通过区分大脑作为管理者和作为传感器的形象，介绍了一个关于“神经史学与科学史”的聚焦板块：前者将大脑视为身体的执行控制中心，后者则将其视为生物体与整个现实之间的接口。研讨会上对神经史学出现所表达的大多数惊愕源于大脑作为管理者的概念，这一概念植根于对人性的“生物主义”理解，近年来这种理解已与各种邪恶的“新自由主义”政治和经济议程纠缠在一起。然而，鉴于神经史学的主要倡导者丹尼尔·斯梅尔对进化理论对历史实践的潜在影响所表现出的复杂态度，或许将他更好地理解为大脑作为传感器传统的一部分。这一传统在当前神经科学的表述中 largely suppressed ，有着深厚的神学渊源，并最终关注我们如何顺应神圣的频率，尤其是通过技术扩展人类神经系统的能力来实现。本文满怀同情地探讨了这一观点对历史实践的影响。 （注：原文中“largely suppressed”这里翻译不太准确，可能是有遗漏信息，推测完整可能是“largely suppressed in current representations of neuroscience”，但按要求不能加解释，所以保留原文形式）
