P. M. S. Hacker - Philosophical Foundations of Neuroscience

11 11Aristotle, De Somno 455a15–20.

12 12e.g. L. Weiskrantz, Blindsight: A Case Study and Implications (Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1986); Weiskrantz, ‘Varieties of residual experiences’, Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 32 (1980), pp. 365–86. See §17.3.1.

13 13The argument is curious, inasmuch as it is unclear in what sense he thinks we discriminate white from sweet. To be sure, we possess the faculties to see white things and distinguish them from other coloured things, and to taste sweet things and distinguish them from things with other tastes, and we (language-users) also possess the concepts of white (and other colours) and sweet (and other gustatory qualities). But we do not discriminate white things from sweet things; nor do we need any further organ to differentiate white from sweet (for what would it be to confuse them?).

14 14Aristotle, De Somno 455a.

15 15Aristotle, De Memoria 450a9–14.

16 16Cicero, Tusculan Disputations 1.10.22, quoted by D. Furley, ‘Aristotle the philosopher of nature’, in D. Furley (ed.), From Aristotle to Augustine, vol. iv of Routledge History of Philosophy (Routledge, London, 1999), p. 16. Note that Cicero must surely be mistaken in ascribing to Aristotle the view that the soul is made of anything.

17 17Galenus, Hippocratis de natura hominis commentaria III, In Hippocratis de victu acutorum commentaria IV, De diaeta Hippocratis in morbis acutis, ed. J. Mewaldt (Teubner, Berlin/Leipzig, 1914), p. 70, 5–6.

18 18H. Von Staden, Herophilus (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1989), pp. 155–6.

19 19Ibid. T 77a & 77b.

20 20Galen, ‘On the use of the parts ’ 8.11 (III 665.7K = I. pp. 482–4. Helmrich = Herophilus Frs 77a & 78. Von Staden).

21 21Ibid.

22 22‘De partibus corporis humani ’, p. 185, 5–6. Daremberg – Ruells; T81 Herophilus. Fr.125 Von Steden.

23 23F. D. Retief and L. Colliers, ‘The nervous system in antiquity’, The South African Medical Journal, 98, no. 10 (2008), pp. 768–72. H. Von Staden, Herophilus (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1989), pp. 159–206, 248, 314.

24 24M. R. Bennett, History of the Synapse (Taylor, London, 2001).

25 25C. Galen, Du Movement des muscles, sect. I, ch. 1, French translation by C. Daremberg, in Oeuvres anatomiques, physiologiques et médicales de Galen (Ballière, Paris, 1854–6), vol. 2, p. 323.

26 26For further detail, see M. R. Bennett, ‘The early history of the synapse: from Plato to Sherrington’, Brain Research Bulletin, 50 (1999), pp. 95–118.

27 27C. Galen, Des Lieux affectés, sect. IV, ch. 3, tr. Daremberg in Oeuvres, vol. 2, p. 590; C. Galen, Utilité de parties du corps, sect. IX, chs 13–14, tr. Daremberg in Oeuvres, vol. 1, pp. 593–7; see also W. H. L. Duckworth, Galen on Anatomical Procedures, ed. M. C. Lyons and B. Towers (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1962), pp. 22–6.

28 28C. Galen, Utilité de parties du corps, sect. IX, ch. 14, tr. Daremberg in Oeuvres, vol. 1, pp. 597f.

29 29C. Galen, Hippocrates librum de alimento commentarius, sect. III, ch.1, in K. G. Kühn (ed.), Opera Omnia Claudii Galeni (Cnobloch, Leipzig, 1821–33), vol. 15, p. 257.

30 30C. Galen, De Symptomatum Differentis, sect. VII, in Kühn (ed.), Opera Omnia, vol. 7, pp. 55–6.

31 31C. Galen, Utilité de parties du corps, sect. VIII, ch. 6, tr. Daremberg in Oeuvres, vol. 1, pp. 541–3.

32 32C. Galen, Des Lieux affectés, sect. IV, ch. 3, tr. Daremberg in Oeuvres, vol. 2, p. 590.

33 33Nemesius, ‘The nature of man’, in Cyril of Jerusalem and Nemesius of Emesa, tr. and ed. William Telfer (Westminster Press, Philadelphia, 1955), pp. 341–2.

34 34Presumably by ‘imagination’ here Nemesius means sensibility.

35 35Nemesius, ‘Nature of man’, pp. 321 and 331f.

36 36F. Rahman, Avicenna’ s Psychology (Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1952), p. 31.

37 37A. L. Benton and R. Joynt, ‘Early descriptions of aphasia’, Archives of Neurology, 3 (1960), pp. 205–22. See also Antonio Guainerio’ s Opera medica (Antonio de Carcano, Pavia, 1481).

38 38A. Vesalius, De humani corporis fabrica (Basel, 1543), bk. VII, ch. i, p. 623.

39 39W. Singer, Vesalius on the Human Brain (Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1952), p. 40.

40 40J. Fernel, De naturali parte medicinae (Simon de Colines, Paris, 1542); see Physiologia, bk. II, Praefatio.

41 41Aquinas, capitalizing on Aristotle’s obscure remarks about the active intellect, argued that ‘the intellectual principle which is called the mind or intellect has an operation through itself (per se) in which the body does not participate. Nothing, however, can operate through itself (per se) unless it subsists through itself, for activity belongs to a being in act … Consequently, the human soul, which is called the intellect or mind, is something incorporeal and subsisting’ (Summa Theologiae I, 76, 1).

42 42For a discussion of Aquinas’s philosophy of psychology, see A. J. P. Kenny, Aquinas on Mind (Routledge, London, 1993).

43 43Fernel, Physiologia, bk. VI, ch. 13.

44 44Ibid., bk. IX, ch. 8, p. 109a.

45 45Descartes, Principles of Philosophy, I-9. Repr. in The Philosophical Writings of Descartes, vol. 1, tr. J. Cottingham, R. Stoothoff and D. Murdoch (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1985), p. 195. Subsequent page references to this translation will be abbreviated ‘CSM’. References to the canonical Oeuvres de Descartes, ed. Ch. Adam and P. Tannery, rev. edn (Paris: Vrin/C. N. R. S., 1964–76) will be given in the form ‘AT’ followed by volume and page numbers – here AT VIII A, 7. Other references are given by section number.

46 46Descartes, Optics, CSM I, pp. 152–75; AT VI, 81–146.

47 47Bennett, ‘Early history of the synapse’.

48 48Descartes, Treatise on Man, CSM I, p. 100; AT XI, 129.

49 49Descartes, Passions of the Soul, I-7.

50 50Ibid., I-10.

51 51C. S. Sherrington, Man on his Nature, 2nd edn (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1953), p. 151.

52 52Descartes, Passions of the Soul, I-31.

53 53Ibid., I-32, italics added.

54 54Descartes, Treatise on Man, CSM I, p. 106; AT XI, 119.

55 55Descartes, Optics, CSM I, p. 167; AT VI, 130.

56 56There is some controversy as to whether Descartes considered the soul, a res cogitans, to be a part, i.e. the immortal part, of a human being or only a constituent substance. For discussion, see Appendix 3 below, pp. 511–12.

57 57T. Willis, De anima brutorum (Thomas Dring, London, 1683). English translation by S. Pordage: Two Discourses Concerning the Soul of Brutes, which is that of the Vital and Sensitive of Man (Scholars’ Facsimiles & Reprints, Gainesville, FL, 1971).

58 58T. Willis, Cerebri anatome, cui accessit nervorum descriptio et usus (Thomas Dring, London, 1681); for translation, see Tercentenary Facsimile Edition, The Anatomy of the Brain and Nerves, tr. S. Pordage, ed. William Feidel (McGill University Press, Montreal, 1965). Subsequent references in the text to this volume are flagged ‘ABN ’ followed by the page number.

59 59Willis, Two Discourses Concerning the Soul of Brutes, pp. 43f.

60 60Ibid.

61 61J. Prochàska, ‘De functionibus systemis nervosi, et observationes anatomico-pathologicae’, in Adnotationum Academicarum (W. Gerle, Prague, 1784), tr. T. Laycock, as ‘A dissertation on the functions of the nervous system’, in Unzer and Procháska on the Nervous System (Sydenham Society, London, 1851), pp. 141–3.

62 62D. Mistichelli, ‘Trattato dell’Apoplessia’ (Roma, A de Rossi alla Piazza di Ceri), tr. C. D. O’Malley, in E. Clarke and C. D. O’Malley, The Human Brain and Spinal Cord (University of California Press, Berkeley, 1968), pp. 282–3.

63 63A. Stuart, Lecture III of the Croonian Lectures, Proceedings of the Royal Society, 40 (1739), p. 36.