Soul Made Flesh: The Discovery of the Brain — and How It Changed the World
http://www.100md.com
《新英格兰医药杂志》
As its title suggests, this book was written for interested nonmedical readers and for physicians other than neurologists, neuroscientists, or medical historians. But readers expecting a detailed analysis of the mind–body relationship should look elsewhere — for example, in Adam Zeman's Consciousness: A User's Guide (New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 2003) or Antonio Damasio's Descartes' Error: Emotion, Reason, and the Human Brain (London: Pan Macmillan, 1995). The story that is told in Soul Made Flesh centers on the life and work of Thomas Willis (1621–1675) in a way that resembles both a biography and a eulogy.
The main discovery that the author attributes to Willis is that of the brain as the sole organ governing sensations, motions, emotions, memory, and reason. It is true that until the Renaissance, medical teaching was dominated by the teachings of Galen (129–ca. 199), who explained mental functions as interactions between the heart and the cerebral ventricles. Willis may have provided definitive proof that the mind resided in the brain, especially by pointing out the anatomical and functional analogy between the brains of humans and those of animals (i.e., the common anima brutorum, as distinct from the human soul in a religious sense, which Willis was careful enough to leave room for). Yet he built on the work of others — not only Vesalius and Descartes, to whom this book gives ample attention, but also Franciscus Sylvius. Hence, the "discovery of the brain" was an evolution, not a revolution such as William Harvey's startling conclusion (published in 1628) that veins transported blood toward the heart instead of away from it. It is also true that Willis attributed distinct functions to specific parts of the brain, but only in a fairly general way (e.g., the cerebellum was supposed to drive the internal organs) — a tad less hypothetical than Descartes's mechanical model in which the pineal gland was thought to wiggle around and spurt animal spirits to specific points in the ventricular walls.
Willis's main contributions to medicine are in the realm of anatomy, although he left some astute clinical descriptions. Again, he was not the first to study the base of the brain by removing it as a whole before cutting it. Vesalius and Varolio produced rather crude representations in this way, and Vesling clearly outlined the basal arteries — though not quite the full circle. It is primarily for the accuracy of Willis's anatomical observations that his name has become enshrined. (Incidentally, he also coined the term "neurologie.") Willis's fame owes a great deal to the delicate etchings of Christopher Wren, who later became an architect and helped to rebuild London after the great fire of 1666. Other virtuosos who made up the "Oxford circle" during the Republican era (1646–1660) were Ralph Bathurst, Robert Boyle, Robert Hooke, Richard Lower, and William Petty. After the Restoration, the circle evolved into the Royal Society. The author cleverly weaves the personal stories of these scientists and the larger story of the English Civil War through that of Thomas Willis's life and work.
The brain–mind relationship emerges again at the close of the book, where the tale takes a big leap and culminates in functional magnetic resonance imaging as a tool for studying mental processes — in my perception, a humble start rather than an apotheosis. The book has been handsomely produced and typeset; it must have been for aesthetic reasons that the notes were not numbered in the text. Historians will probably also frown at the author's romantic penchant to adorn his dramatis personae with emotions and aims.
In a nutshell, Soul Made Flesh makes good reading as an introduction to the work of Thomas Willis and to medicine in the 17th century.
J. van Gijn, M.D.
University Medical Center
3584 CX Utrecht, the Netherlands
j.vangijn@neuro.azu.nl(By Carl Zimmer. 367 pp. N)
The main discovery that the author attributes to Willis is that of the brain as the sole organ governing sensations, motions, emotions, memory, and reason. It is true that until the Renaissance, medical teaching was dominated by the teachings of Galen (129–ca. 199), who explained mental functions as interactions between the heart and the cerebral ventricles. Willis may have provided definitive proof that the mind resided in the brain, especially by pointing out the anatomical and functional analogy between the brains of humans and those of animals (i.e., the common anima brutorum, as distinct from the human soul in a religious sense, which Willis was careful enough to leave room for). Yet he built on the work of others — not only Vesalius and Descartes, to whom this book gives ample attention, but also Franciscus Sylvius. Hence, the "discovery of the brain" was an evolution, not a revolution such as William Harvey's startling conclusion (published in 1628) that veins transported blood toward the heart instead of away from it. It is also true that Willis attributed distinct functions to specific parts of the brain, but only in a fairly general way (e.g., the cerebellum was supposed to drive the internal organs) — a tad less hypothetical than Descartes's mechanical model in which the pineal gland was thought to wiggle around and spurt animal spirits to specific points in the ventricular walls.
Willis's main contributions to medicine are in the realm of anatomy, although he left some astute clinical descriptions. Again, he was not the first to study the base of the brain by removing it as a whole before cutting it. Vesalius and Varolio produced rather crude representations in this way, and Vesling clearly outlined the basal arteries — though not quite the full circle. It is primarily for the accuracy of Willis's anatomical observations that his name has become enshrined. (Incidentally, he also coined the term "neurologie.") Willis's fame owes a great deal to the delicate etchings of Christopher Wren, who later became an architect and helped to rebuild London after the great fire of 1666. Other virtuosos who made up the "Oxford circle" during the Republican era (1646–1660) were Ralph Bathurst, Robert Boyle, Robert Hooke, Richard Lower, and William Petty. After the Restoration, the circle evolved into the Royal Society. The author cleverly weaves the personal stories of these scientists and the larger story of the English Civil War through that of Thomas Willis's life and work.
The brain–mind relationship emerges again at the close of the book, where the tale takes a big leap and culminates in functional magnetic resonance imaging as a tool for studying mental processes — in my perception, a humble start rather than an apotheosis. The book has been handsomely produced and typeset; it must have been for aesthetic reasons that the notes were not numbered in the text. Historians will probably also frown at the author's romantic penchant to adorn his dramatis personae with emotions and aims.
In a nutshell, Soul Made Flesh makes good reading as an introduction to the work of Thomas Willis and to medicine in the 17th century.
J. van Gijn, M.D.
University Medical Center
3584 CX Utrecht, the Netherlands
j.vangijn@neuro.azu.nl(By Carl Zimmer. 367 pp. N)