Please read chapter 3. After reading the chapter, please respond to the following questions:
What were three (3) things from the chapter that you found interesting? Why were they interesting to you? What one (1) thing did you find the least interesting? Why?
What did you read in the chapter that you think will be most useful to in understanding the history of psychology?
How, in what ways, does this chapter relate (build on) to the previous chapters?
What topic would you like to learn more about? Why ?
What ideas did you have while reading the chapter?
Once you are done with your post make list of the terms and terminology you used in your post.
RA: Chapter 3
After reading chapter 3, one thing I found interesting was the story of Phineas Gage. I have learned about this man several times throughout my course history in psychology, but his story has always been interesting to me. I find it quite amazing that after his accident he was able to function and even speak. His story posed many questions to scientists about the brain, specifically the left frontal cortex, and the functions that each part has. The next thing I found interesting in this chapter was the discussion of the guillotine. It was interesting to me that your body can still move and react even after your head has been cut off. I found it interesting, though, that humans were interested in studying severed heads of animals and/or other humans. Surely we have studied stranger topics, but I just found this bit to be interesting to me. The third thing I found interesting from this chapter was the topic of phrenology. This is something I have actually not heard of or learned anything about. This chapter gives a great description of the history of it and what accomplishments were attributed to phrenology. Gall was actually correct in many of his findings for what certain areas of the brain are responsible for. The part that I don't understand is thinking that we can determine the mental abilities of someone simply by feeling bumps on their head.
A part of the chapter that didn't keep my attention was the section about synapses and the neuron theory. I have taken a biopsychology course and This topic I have never been interested in.
The part I found to be most important to understanding the history of psychology would be the section about psychologists challenging each other. More importantly, why these psychologists felt it necessary to question each other’s work. As discussed throughout class so far, we must be skeptical when learning anything. By having these psychologists challenge each other’s work and theories, we progressed in a very positive way.
As with most history books, they are written in chronological order. Chapter 3 expands on the first 2 chapters and tries to answer the questions posed in the beginning of the book. It also gives a more detailed description of topics that were previously mentioned, helping the reader to better understand any subject that wasn’t thoroughly discussed.
I would like to learn more about phrenology. I am now much more interested in the different ways that scientists would use phrenology to study the brain. Also, in what ways do they take these findings and interpret them to mean what they think they mean? I have a lot of questions about this topic.
While reading this chapter, I thought about what it would be like to live during this time. People were forced to think about things in the simplest ways because they had no other answers. Living without the technology we have today is very hard for me to imagine.
Phineas Gage, psychology, frontal cortex, guillotine, phrenology, Gall, synapses and the neuron theory, psychologists
Who hasn’t heard about the incredible story of Phineas Gage? Of course I found that story interesting. I first heard about it my first year at college and was amazed at what happened, but more amazed that he lived through it. It is incredible that only his personality changed after his terrible accident of getting a tamping iron through his skull. He was definitely a big deal when it came to studying the brain and his doctors had to of been secretly excited about his accidents seeing as they would be the ones to investigate it more.
The second thing that I found interesting was mentioned throughout the chapter with multiple people and animal experiments, and that is the fact that different sections of our brain control different things. I think that it is fascinating that the space between a couple mm in our brain can have two completely different functions. The brain in both humans and animals is fascinating even though I am not okay with scientists using animals in an inhumane ways for research.
The third thing that I found interesting was about Helmholtz’s studies about vision and hearing. I thought that it was amazing that he was able to come up with the ophthalmoscope which could examine the retina. I think it is most interesting that he was able to build off of Thomas Young’s theory and create his own color vision theory called trichromatic theory (Young-Helmholtz theory). It is hard to believe that in the Enlightenment period they were able to come up with the primary colors.
A thing that I wasn’t interested in was the parts on nerves and where they are and how they work. I mean it is interesting to know what they do, but reading about the science part of it is very boring to me and I had a hard time getting through that part of the chapter.
In understanding the history of psychology I think that it is important to learn about what other psychologist did and how they both succeeded and failed. Like with Fowler and phrenology, measuring skulls, I think that it is important to know that he opened the doors to other psychologist to figure out what the brain could all do even though in the end his method failed. I think it is important for all scientists in all majors to doubt each other just in case someone wasn’t right in there research.
This chapter builds off of the first two chapters because this textbook is going in chronological order of events in psychologies past. This chapter is just the next stop in the timeline, Enlightenment, so that now we are getting to see what the next generation of psychologists was able to uncover about both humans and animals.
After reading this chapter I found myself quite sad because I am the person completely against animal experimentation. If they really wanted to know how the brain would react to electrical stimulation that volunteer yourself for the study. Building off of the idea I had while reading this chapter I wanted to learn more about people who like Phineas Gage have gotten in crazy accidents and survived. I think it would be interesting to learn about other survival stories that have benefitted psychology in some way or another.
Phineas gage, personality, functions of the brain, psychology, fowler, phrenology, psychologist, enlightenment, animal experimentation, electrical stimulation, retina, ophthalmoscope, Helmholtz, Young-Helmholtz theory, trichromatic theory, Thomas Young, primary colors
The first thing that I found interesting while reading this chapter was the discovery on reflexes. We heard a little about reflexes last chapter when we learned about Descartes, but it went more indepth this chapter with Whytt. He said that reflexes originated with the spinal cord, and he did extensive research with animals to prove this theory. He distinguished between voluntary and involuntary actions. I thought this was interesting because I wouldn't have guessed that our reflexes originated in our spinal cords. The next thing that struck my interst was the controversy over the Guillotin. Back in the day, the wanted form of execution that was "humane" so instead of using an axe to cut of someones head, they switched to the Guillotin. (Like that was any better.) But, they noticed after a person's head was sliced off by this, they had some twitching motions in their legs. This lead to people questioning whether or not we still had consciousness after the head was chopped off. So, this being said, a man names Theodor Bischoff studied this problem by thrusting fingers towards the beheaded's eye and putting smellings salts under their nose, after discovering that the head showed no reaction, he concluded that consciousness ended once the head was disconnected from the body. Therefore proving that the twitching was involuntary. I thought this was interesting because first of all, they thought the Guillotin was more humane than chopping someone's head off with an axe, and second of all, because our body still twitches once its detached from the head. The third and final thing I found interesting the was section on Phernology. This section said that different parts of the brain served different functions. Also, it said that the left side of the brain controls the right side of the body, and the right side of the brain controls the left side of the body. I just think its fascinating that one side of the brain controls the opposite side of the body. Why wouldn't the same side of the brain control that same side of the body? The part of the chapter that I found least interesting and don't really want to know more about was the section on Enlightenment. I have learned about that in so many classes I'm sick of hearing about it. The section in this chapter that I believe is most useful in the History of Psychology would have to be the section on brain functions. Because Psychology is essentially the study of how the brain works and why people act the way they do.
Terms: Reflexes, Guillotin, Spinal COrd Phernology, Whytt
Despite its title, I found several things in Chapter 3 to be very interesting and relevant; relevant not only to this class but also to other classes of mine (mainly biopsych). Throughout the entirety of this chapter, I found myself wondering "how on earth people could even imagine some of the theories discussed, with such little technology, let alone make game changing discoveries."
The first thing that caught my distinct attention was the segment on The Bell-Megendie Law. I found this section interesting for two reasons; the "multiple" dispute and the finding that reflexes have two components (sensation and movement) that are controlled by two different kinds of roots within the spinal cord (posterior and anterior). Although Bell had come up with similar ideas before Magendie, he had no scientific research or actual experimentation . Bell's theories were also disproved whereas Magendie's were not. For this reason, Magendie, in the academic world, is credited with the actual law, his name is tied to Bell's simply due to the largely public dispute of who to give credit to. While reading this, I found it displeasing that it actually mattered that much on who to give credit to. I realize that both of them had worked very hard to reach their different conclusions and were both great conclusions, but I thought it was silly to fight over who was going to get credit for it. Rather, I feel as though the focus should have been more on the break through discovery and great contribution to science instead of the individuals behind it. As for the actual finding of what constitutes the Bell-Megendie Law, I found it astonishing that men in the 1700s-1800s were able to carry out such profound surgical and scientific procedures.
The next bit of Chapter 3 that I found to be particularly interesting was the segment on Hermann von Helmoltz. Although he started his career and research on the physiology side, Helmotz eventually helped bridge the gap between physiology and psychology, developing theories that are considered partially correct, even today. He became the leading expert on the visionary and auditory sensory systems. On his way to such success, Helmotz studied with Johannes Muller. However, the two differed on their views of vitalism and materialism. Muller was a vitalist, believing that there is a vital force that is much greater than us and that can never be reduced further. Helmotz was a materialist for he believed that humans were living organisms that could be reduced to its original physical, mechanical, or chemical entity through scientific methods. As I was reading this, I thought about what I learned in high school science, "energy cannot be created or destroyed." It was fascinating to me that this debate of an existence of a possible vital force, unknown to the human mind has been with us for so long.
Lastly, “spinal dogs” were mentioned several times within Chapter 3. I found the research done with “spinal dogs” to be very intriguing; specifically, Sir Charles Sherrington and his research dealing with reflexes. “Spinal dogs” was the term used to identify dogs whose spinal cords had been surgically severed from their brains. As most of us know, when you scratch a dog’s ribs, their hind legs shake uncontrollably. What Sherrington found, through his comparison of “spinal dogs” and normal dogs was that this reflex was more pronounced in “spinal dogs.” This led him to the conclusion that the cortex has some numbing effect on the reflex action. I found that piece of information very interesting, that an animal could move without having their spinal cord and cortex intact. Also, the whole concept of “spinal dogs” was eerie, yet fascinating to me.
The concept of neurons and neural activity is very hard for me to grasp and I find reading it to be a mixture of boring and too hard to understand. The part about Camillo Golgi and his work with the Golgi Stain was my least favorite bit of the chapter. I vaguely know what a Golgi stain is and compared to the rest of the chapters talk about “cool” experiments dealing with things such as the “spinal dogs” this part was hard to bear.
Overall, I enjoyed Chapter 3. It was very beneficial in helping me tie together various pieces of information that I have learned in other psychology classes. This more holistic knowledge, will (hopefully) allow for me to have a better understanding of the history of psychology. Furthermore, knowing how and why psychology came to have such strong roots in physiology made my biopsych class much more relevant to me and easier to understand.
This Chapter did a great job of building from the previous 2 chapters because it again made sure to point out the dangers of thinking in presentist ways when reflecting on the work of these great leaders in psychology’s history. It told how some of these built their ideas on the work of individuals in Chapter 2, such as Descartes.
While reading this chapter, I thought about how far our science and technology has come today. Will there ever be an end? Will we constantly learn new things about the brain/the neurology of human nervous system? Are there any current theories that we learn today that will someday be discredited in future textbooks?
Phrenology was discussed in Chapter 3 a great deal amount. Although it has been discredited as a science, I found it very interesting for two reasons: the basic concept of telling what is "wrong" with a person by their brain shape, etc..., and the fact that although it had no real scientific evidence, phrenology stayed popular within the mainstream public for so long. I think it would be interesting to look up different aspects of phrenology that were practiced during those times.
Terms used: reflexes, spinal dogs, neurons, Descartes,multiples, The Bell-Megendie Law, Phrenology, Helmotz, Johannes Muller, vitalism, materialism.
Despite its title, I found several things in Chapter 3 to be very interesting and relevant; relevant not only to this class but also to other classes of mine (mainly biopsych). Throughout the entirety of this chapter, I found myself wondering "how on earth people could even imagine some of the theories discussed, with such little technology, let alone make game changing discoveries."
The first thing that caught my distinct attention was the segment on The Bell-Megendie Law. I found this section interesting for two reasons; the "multiple" dispute and the finding that reflexes have two components (sensation and movement) that are controlled by two different kinds of roots within the spinal cord (posterior and anterior). Although Bell had come up with similar ideas before Magendie, he had no scientific research or actual experimentation . Bell's theories were also disproved whereas Magendie's were not. For this reason, Magendie, in the academic world, is credited with the actual law, his name is tied to Bell's simply due to the largely public dispute of who to give credit to. While reading this, I found it displeasing that it actually mattered that much on who to give credit to. I realize that both of them had worked very hard to reach their different conclusions and were both great conclusions, but I thought it was silly to fight over who was going to get credit for it. Rather, I feel as though the focus should have been more on the break through discovery and great contribution to science instead of the individuals behind it. As for the actual finding of what constitutes the Bell-Megendie Law, I found it astonishing that men in the 1700s-1800s were able to carry out such profound surgical and scientific procedures.
The next bit of Chapter 3 that I found to be particularly interesting was the segment on Hermann von Helmoltz. Although he started his career and research on the physiology side, Helmotz eventually helped bridge the gap between physiology and psychology, developing theories that are considered partially correct, even today. He became the leading expert on the visionary and auditory sensory systems. On his way to such success, Helmotz studied with Johannes Muller. However, the two differed on their views of vitalism and materialism. Muller was a vitalist, believing that there is a vital force that is much greater than us and that can never be reduced further. Helmotz was a materialist for he believed that humans were living organisms that could be reduced to its original physical, mechanical, or chemical entity through scientific methods. As I was reading this, I thought about what I learned in high school science, "energy cannot be created or destroyed." It was fascinating to me that this debate of an existence of a possible vital force, unknown to the human mind has been with us for so long.
Lastly, “spinal dogs” were mentioned several times within Chapter 3. I found the research done with “spinal dogs” to be very intriguing; specifically, Sir Charles Sherrington and his research dealing with reflexes. “Spinal dogs” was the term used to identify dogs whose spinal cords had been surgically severed from their brains. As most of us know, when you scratch a dog’s ribs, their hind legs shake uncontrollably. What Sherrington found, through his comparison of “spinal dogs” and normal dogs was that this reflex was more pronounced in “spinal dogs.” This led him to the conclusion that the cortex has some numbing effect on the reflex action. I found that piece of information very interesting, that an animal could move without having their spinal cord and cortex intact. Also, the whole concept of “spinal dogs” was eerie, yet fascinating to me.
The concept of neurons and neural activity is very hard for me to grasp and I find reading it to be a mixture of boring and too hard to understand. The part about Camillo Golgi and his work with the Golgi Stain was my least favorite bit of the chapter. I vaguely know what a Golgi stain is and compared to the rest of the chapters talk about “cool” experiments dealing with things such as the “spinal dogs” this part was hard to bear.
Overall, I enjoyed Chapter 3. It was very beneficial in helping me tie together various pieces of information that I have learned in other psychology classes. This more holistic knowledge, will (hopefully) allow for me to have a better understanding of the history of psychology. Furthermore, knowing how and why psychology came to have such strong roots in physiology made my biopsych class much more relevant to me and easier to understand.
This Chapter did a great job of building from the previous 2 chapters because it again made sure to point out the dangers of thinking in presentist ways when reflecting on the work of these great leaders in psychology’s history. It told how some of these built their ideas on the work of individuals in Chapter 2, such as Descartes.
While reading this chapter, I thought about how far our science and technology has come today. Will there ever be an end? Will we constantly learn new things about the brain/the neurology of human nervous system? Are there any current theories that we learn today that will someday be discredited in future textbooks?
This chapter also talked about Phrenology several times. Although it has been discredited as a science, I found it to be very interesting. I think it would be fun to research the beliefs and practices that were taught in mainstream society during phrenology's peak of popularity.
Terms used: Descartes, The Bell-Megendie Law, phrenology, multiples, neuron, spinal dogs, Helmotz, Johannes Muller, vitalism, materialism, golgi, cortex
While reading I found three things that were interesting to read about. I liked the part about Bee
ll-Magendie Law. The remarkable Phinneas Gage section was also entertaining to read about. Lastly, I enjoyed reading about the part that dealt with Sherringtons discovery of the syanpse. One thing I did not reading about in this chapter was Helmholtz on vision and audition.
I liked the part about Magendie and Beell because it related to the last couple chapters and this idea about "multiple". Which is two scientists discovering the same theory at approximately the same time period. I thought that the discovery of the different types of roots was fasinating. Discovering that posterior roots and anterior roots controlled different reflexes seems like it would be a hard thing to do in that time period, so I was amazed by that. I did not know that different roots controlled senstation and motor movements, and it provided me with this idea of that the body runs like a machine. I felt as if Bell was screwed over just because he was not as thourough in his research, and I like the fact that history can go back and sort out who deserves what credit.
The story on Phinneas Gage was interesting to read about. Although, unfortunate for him it helped history discover what parts of the brain control what systems. In previous classes I learned about Phinneas Gage and the dicovery of the brain that control personality and behavior. Without freak accidents like this, it would be hard to believe how we would discover functions of the brain.
The last story that was interesting to me was Sherrignton and the discovery of the synapse. A synapse is a gap between neurons at which messages are passed chemically to dictate movements or cognitions. This was a interesting discovery because before hand scientists did not know how messages were passed through the brain and to what parts of the body. Sherrington later won the nobel prize for his research which was very deserving. Sherrington later discovered temporal summation and spatial summantion. Temporal summation is stimuli separated in time combine to produce and response. Spatial summation is the occurance when two or more adjacent points on the skin were stimulated at the same time. This was huge because this concluded that summation must occur at the points where the endpoints of neurons met each other, AKA the synapse.
One thing that I did not like about the chapter was Helmholtz on vision and audition. I do know why butit just did not grab my attention like the other sections of the chapter. It seemed to drag on and I did not get the difference between opponent process theory and the resonace theory. The opponent process theory was that color sensitive cells were designed to respond to opposing pairs of colors. The resonance theory of hearing was that different frequencies of sound were detected by receptors located in differnet places along the basilar membrane of the cochlea. Just saying those two definitions bored me, and I did not find them relavent to me. I figure if I understand the color wheel than I understand this part of the chapter.
A section that I read that I thought would be most interesting to the understanding of the history of psychology would probably be the Mangie and Bell fued. I think that those discoveries are important to not only psychology but also to science. And since this book is referring to psychology following the scientific method more and more that this is most important. I do think this is the most fasinating and relavent to the history because it deals with how our bodies respond to different stimuli and later the discovery of the synapse which lead to control areas of the brain. When I think of all the information that I have read in the book, I think that these two are the most relevant in this new age of psychology becoming becoming more science based.
This chapter builds on what I just talked about. The idea that psycholgy is becoming more of a science. Last chapter, Decartes, was the main founder of the scientic method, and Bell, Magnie, and Helmtz just expanded on his ideals. They had more resources and information than Decartes did and they used it to their advantage to discover not only a scientific priniciple, but the discovery of many things using that exact prinicple Decarted developed.
A topic that I would like to learn more about would be Phinneas Gage. Not his story, but the discoveries that were found because of his accident. He was a pioneer into the discoveries of the brocas apashia and weinechers aphasia just out of bad luck. He was more a contribution to the history of psychology than he would ever imagined. So, something that I would like to know more about is what other discoveries were made from Phinneas Gage.
Some ideas that I had while reading the chapter mainly came from the Bell and Mangie section of the book. I was reading and thought that this Bell guy got the crap end of the stick just because he did not write up as well of a report on his findings. Bell did not recieve any credit during his time because of this. Another thing I was thinking about was how far humane practices have some since these times. Nowadays we would never be aloud to cut frogs heads off, or cut the roots of a puppy dog. Although it probably would lead to more discoveries, it can not happen anymore. Lastly, I thought about how unfortunate Phinneas Gage was to be a victim of such an accident, but at the same time how such an unfortunate accident could lead to so much discovery. That is America for you, mistakes that worked.
Terms: Reflex action, Bell-Magendie, Anterior roots, posterior roots, nervous system, Decartes, Helmhotz, Helmhotz vision and audition, resonance theory, opponent process theory, Phinneas Gage, Broca apahsia, Sherrington, Synapse, temporal summation, spatial summation,
One thing I enjoyed learning about from chapter three was the section on the guillotine, I personally just thought it was interesting to think about that even back in the 1700’s people were using their observation skills and realized that even after the head was severed from the body, parts of the body still had movement. I enjoy thinking of things like this occurring and trying to put myself in that position knowing that they have no clue what’s actually going on, but given that I have some background knowledge about the brain and spinal cord I can make an educated guess on what’s happening even if I wasn’t that educated on the subject in the first place. Another thought on this topic is that given that they no longer needed ‘big hairy men’ to chop off someone’s head, the guillotine was considered humane; obviously something not true today, but the point here is yes it’s inhumane but I’ve always thought of these inhumane practices throughout time to be seen as lessons and basically the stepping stones to where we are today. An example being if Bischoff hadn’t thought deeper into the reasoning’s behind the movements after decapitation, then when would society have asked the questions of basic reflex actions and the role of the spinal cord?
While reading the chapter I noticed I was reading a lot about Herman Helmholtz, who was named, “The Physiologist’s of Physiologists. After reading numerous pages on Helmholtz it just kind of dawned on me that he seemed to have been really intelligent, he published numerous books and findings on many different topics; ranging from neural impulses, to color within the eyes and then to our auditory senses. Just reading about him was a bit overwhelming for me given all the broad topics he covered.
Lastly I found the topic regarding the Neuron Theory to be interesting simply because of the process that it involved. Such as new improvements to the microscope and that you could actually solidify the brain by soaking it in alcohol which allowed Gratiolet to be able to trace the optic nerve all the way to the back of the brain into to occipital cortex. All of this eventually led to the use of paraffin which hardened the brain and allowed the brain to be cut into very thin slices, also known as sectioning, which then could be observed by staining. I just thought all of this information to be interesting considering it seemed like it just spiraled down from one simple improvement in technology.
One thing I didn’t find particularly interesting was probably the in depth reading of the nervous system, I get that it’s important and it plays a huge role in the way the brain and our bodies work, but its more scientific based and that seems to get a little boring to read at times. However, one thing that I did enjoy reading and I think that will help me in learning about the history of psychology is the case studies that were done. Or the clinical method; whether it was Phineas Gage the patient labeled as “Tan” I just think the real life example like this are what makes the scientific findings relatable or more understandable.
I would like to learn more about Franz Josef Gall, after reading about his contributions to the brain and its functions, and how he observed that students in his class with different protrusion of their eyes, or shape of their heads learned or seemed to be more intelligent than other students or himself within the class. Although his theory of phrenology is incorrect I think his way of thinking, I think it ultimately led to scientist getting the correct information.
One thing that I found myself thinking throughout the chapter was what if technology, for transportation and communication, had been just a little bit more advanced during the time period of Bell, Magendie, Helmholtz, Reymond, etc. how crazy would that have been if they all could have known what each other was doing, and even gotten together and worked on experiments together. Even though I’m sure if that happened they wouldn’t have gotten much accomplished, and I can just see a room full of white old bearded men arguing about who’s right and who’s wrong- so a flash forward of our government today.
I think this chapter builds off of the other two previous chapters in a way that it’s still tying in psychology with physiology, along with connecting different and their findings with other people of their time and how they found the same information given the fact that they had no idea the other person’s findings even existed. An example being Bell and Magendie and their discoveries of reflexive behaviors and how they both had come about the same discovery ( even though Bell was actually incorrect) but that main point here is they were in two completely different parts of the world, but yet still thinking with the same mind frame.
Terms: guillotine, Bischoff, basic reflex actions, Bell, Magendie, Franz Gall, phrenology, Neuron Theory, optic nerve, occipital cortex, sectioning, Broca, Clinical Method.
The first thing I found to be really interesting in chapter 3 came up rather quickly, I am talking about the enlightenment. It had to have been an extremely exciting time for the great minds of this time. For the first time ever, people were starting to rely on the scientific method to obtain truth rather than relying on authority to give them knowledge. Sir Issac Newton was said to have locked in this train of thought with his book in 1687 called Principia Mathematica. The term enlightenment is spot on for what was happening. We were leaving, what the books says, to be a dark time of ignorance. They were shedding new light on a vast amount of subjects and theories. I thought it was interesting how when the period of enlightenment started, it never stopped. The book even mentions Benjamin Franklin who took ahold of this train of thought and made some major contributions to science. This thinking lead us to try and shed light on many things we had no idea about such as the nervous system.
The second thing I found to be very interesting is the case of Phineas Gage. In 1848 in Vermont, while working on a railway, a tamping iron was rocketed through his eye and out his forehead. Remarkably, he was able to walk with little assistance to the doctors office when back in town. People were amazed by this because they had never seen anything like it. It almost had to be scary to wonder how an individual could live from that injury. However, a lot of optimism was lost in the next few months. Gage's personality had been drastically altered from the accident. Because part of his brain was severed, he experienced several changes. I thought it was really interesting to see the effects it had on him. It really is sad though in a sense because he was never the same. It makes you ask the question, would you rather survive and be altered badly, or just die from the accident?
The third thing I found most interesting of all was the mapping of the brain with electrical stimulation. It is amazing to me how these scientists first thought of doing this. They stimulated different areas of the brain with a small current to see what part of the body it effected. This was a genius way to figure out what parts of the brain control what. No one had ever done what Hitzig and Fritsch were doing. They were touching untouched ground which had to be extremely exciting. These experiments triggered interest in a whole new set of scientists who set out to learn more about brain regions and functions.
This chapter, like the last, shows us how curiosity and creative thinking helped trigger interest in a lot of things that we study today. If these men did not do what they did this early, we would be a lot farther behind in understanding what we do today. This chapter built on the last by explaining how a lot of the work was being opposed from authority. This chapter talks about the turn from authority to the scientific method in obtaining knowledge. Their work was starting to be more and more appreciated. When it really think about it, these authority figures probably set us a back a few decades.
I would really like to learn more about electrical mapping of the brain and how we do it ethically. It would be hard to have everyone agree with what they were doing to these animals but it greatly increased our knowledge. I would like to see how the mapping progressed from what it was when they first started. The main ideas I had while reading this chapter is the curiosity of human nature. These man did not necessarily need to know these things but they set out to get it right. Their curiosity sparked a whole new era in science, even when it was opposed by authority.
terms: enlightenment, Newton, Fritsch, Hitzig, Gage, scientific method, ignorance, authority, electrical mapping, Ben Franklin, phrenology, stimulus
Chapter 3
One thing that I found very interesting in this chapter was the section on phrenology. I really didn't know that this is what the study of the mind was called, but I've always been fascinated by how our mind works. The ideas that Franz Josef Gall insisted on are very interesting in that his theories were revolutionary. The thought that the cortex is much more individualized than people imagined was incredible. Although he was criticized at the time, his work on contralateral functions was great. Along with this I also really liked looking at Figure 3.3 and really getting a good visual on what Gall started in phrenology.
Another thing that I'm sure many people found very interesting was the story of Phineas Gage. I've heard this story before and never become tired of hearing it. It's such an interesting story and really seemed to launch people into the field of phrenology. I think I really find this story interesting mostly for the fact that it's applied psychology. Hearing stories of psychological discoveries is something that anyone interested in psychology should be interesting in, but the fact that this was discovered by an accident, a potentially fatal one at that, makes it that much more interesting. This man could have died, but didn't, this allowed us to use his brain to develop incredible theories that may have never been discovered. Leaping from that, I also find phrenology to be incredible interesting and really enjoy learning about the brain and it's capabilities.
Something else that I found interesting was the work of Paul Broca and Carl Wernicke. I had learned a lot about aphasia in previous classes but I've always found it to be very interesting and like learning more and more about it. What I specifically thought was interesting was how the brain can function in different ways. People who have either Broca's or Wernicke's Aphasia are still functioning, just at a lower level, even with brain damage. I really find the initial story that the book tells about Tan and Broca's findings in him and his eventually removed brain. I also liked the comparison between Broca and how his ideas challenged that Flouren's and his cortex localization.
Something that I really found uninteresting was the section on the creation of the synapse. I took biopsychology last year, although I really liked the class, I have to say that I greatly disliked learning about the synapse. It was dull to learn about and I found the entire thing to be irrelevant to the study of psychology at the time. Needless to say when I saw it named in the heading of the section I was less than thrilled. I didn't care about the synapse itself, therefore, I care even less that Sir Charles Sherrington created it, let alone that he deduced it from his studies of spinal reflexes.
This chapter as a whole will really help me to understand how the theories of the biology of the brain have influenced psychology and psychologists. Without our understanding of the brain, we would really have no idea what were were getting into while experimenting on people. I really think this is most important thing to think about while reading this chapter. We need to focus on how these scientists were able to get ideas about our brain and how we can apply their understanding to help test our modern hypotheses.
Chapter three really built on the ideas of the last chapter because it built on what the philosophers had hypothesized. Chapter two also ended with a discussion on spacial and temporal contiguity which is built on during chapter three while we discuss other parts of the brain. However, I also think chapter three takes what we learned in chapter two to a new level. In chapter two we discuss mostly ideas about psychology that philosophers had. In chapter three we get down to tangible items, such as the brain.
Although I'm sure this is relevant in a different class, I would really like to learn more about phrenology. Even though I took biopsychology, I don't feel like I was well versed on phrenology and would really like to get a better grasp on everything the different lobes of the brain are capable of.
Some of the ideas that i had while reading this chapter were really centralized around the story of Phineas Gage. My main thoughts focused on what we could have accomplished in science had we been able do psychological tests on him. Also, what would psychology be like today if Gage had passed away after being pierced through the brain, or if trod had taken out a different chunk. There are so man "what-if" in that story that could have greatly effected modern psychology.
Terms: Phrenology, Frans Josef Gall, cortex, contralateral function, Phineas Gage, brain, Paul Broca, Carl Wernicke, apasia, Tan, cortex localization, synapse, Sir charles Sherrington, spinal reflexes, hypotheses, philosophers, spacial contiguity, temporal contiguity
Overall I find this chapter very interesting. I like the biological part of psychology. I originally wanted to be a nurse so I like to know how things work. The first thing I found interesting in this chapter was the problem of perception. Everyone may be seeing the same thing but they don’t all perceive it the same. A lot of how we perceive things is about our experiences. Like when we estimate the distance between us and an object we pull from past experiences to guess how far away it is which is called an unconscious inference. Another thing that interested me was the doctrine of the skull. I was intrigued because of watching the move Django Unchained. There is apart when he shows the skull of an African American claiming that three dimples on the inside of the skull prevent the person from being like a white person. Also in one of my other classes we talked about how the brain reacts when it is addicted to substances. The brain in general is interesting to me because it does so much. The last I found interesting was ablation. In my abnormal psychology class we talked about lobotomies and surgeries similar to that. I also found out that they are still performed today.
It was hard for me to find something that I didn’t find interesting in this chapter because I like biology so much. I guess I would have to pick reflex action. I like more of the brain aspect not so much the reflexes. I think the most useful thing in this chapter is how everything works together to form a functioning brain because when we find that something isn’t in that process it usually creates certain symptoms that if we know what’s missing we can fix it. I would like to know more about what people perceive with their senses. Like people that have hallucinations or are color blind fascinate me. I want to know what they see. While reading this chapter I was thinking about how fascinating the brain is. In can have intense injuries and it heals. It does so much; it makes us who we are. The brain is the most mysterious part of the human body. I wonder if we will ever completely understand it.
Terms: problem of perception, unconscious inference, African American, lobotomies, ablation, biology, reflexes, hallucinations
The first interesting thing in chapter three was applying physiology to Psychology through the study of the nervous system. The Bell-Magendie law, for example found that posterior roots of the spinal cord controlled sensation while anterior roots controlled motor responses. This chapter discusses the scientific aspects of our nervous systems. Johannes Muller, who was considered to be the first professor of physiology, also expanded his ideas further about sensory qualities in a doctrine “specific energies of nerves.” He noted that our perception was not aware of the external world, but we are aware of the actions of our nervous system.
The second interesting topic was about Herman von Helmholtz, who is referred to as “the physiologists Physiologist.” According to Muller physical matter was the only reality, there was no vital force. Personally I do not have the stomach for it, but I found it interesting that one of the studies on the vital force was referred to as nervous twitching after a person was guillotined. Helmholtz also did major work in the field of perception, particularly hearing and vision, an example is his resonance theory of hearing.
The third interesting idea was Flourens theory of ablation. Though I feel bad for the animals involved with the study of isolating certain regions of the brain, his studies of specific function for different brain areas was consider important, for example, the cerebellum was the center of motor coordination.
This chapter relates to previous chapters as the scientific part of the history of psychology. The discovery of neurons and electrical synapses was important in understanding the functions of the brain. I would like to learn more about brain functions and how depression and other diseases impact the mind.
Terms:
Bell-Magendie Law, Motor coordination, Specific energy of nerves, Vital Force, Perception, Sensation, Ablation, Phrenology, Cerebellum, Neurons, Synapses, Depression
I found this chapter really interesting do to the fact that it had to do with the workings of the human brain and nervous system, two things I can really get into and visualize as I read.
The first two things I found interesting was the reading on Helmholtz and his work in color vision and hearing. Starting out by inventing the ophthalmoscope, a device capable of examining the retina, Helmholtz became famous with eye doctors and even allowed him to produce a three-volume Handbook of Physiological Optics of research that was published over an eleven-year period. That is impressive and remarkable considering his lifelong love for physics a study he had to take on the side while serving in the army as a medical corps, all as a way to finance a medical career. Only when he brought about his theory on color vision did he become remembered as the best. His study was not of his own but from another that proposed the idea first, known as a multiple, a near simultaneous discovery of a phenomenon (Goodwin, 549), by a Thomas Young. For this reason his theory is known as either the Young-Helmholtz theory or from what Helmholtz liked to call the trichromatic theory. Basically stats that the eye holds three basic color receptors; red, green, and blue, when light wavelength hit these receptors it stimulated them to different degrees and mix; giving a sense of a new color such as yellow. His results are still today quite similar to that of modern-day data we like to call spectral sensitivity curves, a remarkable accomplishment for something done so long ago with so little technology.
Color vision was only a portion of what Helmholtz worked on, he also looked into how our retina’s adjust to or get focused on light? This is where he was able to put his love for physics into play. He provided a detailed analysis on how light rays are bent both by the cornea and through accommodation. Even the perception of depth through an operation he called binocular vision, while asking the same question as that of Berkeley, “how we come to perceive objects in space?”. To even further his fame he pursued the sense of hearing in a theory known as resonance theory, stating we hear different frequencies of sounds according to places along the basilar membrane of the cochlea. Proposing multiple energies for each of the senses: three for color and many for hearing, building yet again off of another theory this time of Mullers. Yet again a fine example on how smart Helmholtz was in his day.
The third thing I found interesting was the famous Broca. Credited for the clinical method, I a way of studying the brains functions without destroying or hurting the human subject. This would be either through studying behavioral and mental brain injuries, such as stroke or illness, and by identifying people with mental disorders and examining their brain after death. A popular study of this method is that of Phineas Gage, a railroad foreman who had an unlikely accident leaving him with a iron rod through his skull. Although he survived the injury he suffered irreversible damage to his behavior and personality, all of which was recorded and documented by his doctor; giving us one of the first clinical method report. Broca is not known for just his method but also his classification and diagnosis of the motor aphasia, which we now know as Broca’s area. He came to this conclusion over the years from examining several patients with all the same left frontal lobe lesions. A motor aphasia that caused the inability to articulate ideas verbally.
The one thing I think I was interested in and unexcited about was the functioning of the nervous system. Partly due to the time frame and what physiologist had to work with at the time, I took a presentism point of view on the topic. I couldn’t sit and read something that was so complex and interesting in today’s society and read about how they thought it worked, killing it in the process. The one thing I think will be the most useful to know from this chapter are the physiologist themselves and their contributions. Contributions that we still to this day use and go by when furthering our own research. The one thing I noticed in this chapter was how almost every physiologist built off of or improved another physiologist theory using, either accommodation or association. Like that of Helmholtz and Berkeley, as stated earlier. I would like to learn more about how the theory of vision progresses throughout the ages along with the anatomy of the brain, more so the functions. As I’m sure we will later on in the book.
Terms: ophthalmoscope, multiple, trichromatic theory, spectral sensitivity, Helmholtz, accommodation, binocular vision, resonance theory, clinical method, Phineas Gage, motor aphasia, presentism
When reading chapter, I found myself intrigued by certain topics. I felt as though the author took what I have learned in a range of other classes and formed this chapter. The first thing I found intriguing in this chapter was the section that discussed the guillotine and the idea if the brain was the center of all consciousness. Through many anatomy classes and biopsychology, this idea seems almost obvious, that of course the control center for consciousness, among other things, is the brain. When the section discussed the possibility of it not being so because of the experiments done, it was interesting to question if there was another center, possibly the heart. However, the final census was that the brain is the center, and these final responses were just involuntary actions. It was interesting to read about this subject because I had never really thought about how the ideas of the brain being in control came about, I just figured it was common sense to all mankind. The second thing I found interesting Helmholtz’s trichromatic theory. This theory is based on the ideas of color-matching experiments. The experiments were full of color overlapping, finding colors that would “mix” when placed on a wall overlapping each other. This experiment concluded “that the eye must contain three different kinds of color receptors, one for each of these so-called primary colors, red, green, and blue.” This is interesting because although Helmholtz was not 100% accurate, he was close in the sense of the three primary colors: red, blue, and yellow. Being an art minor, I found this interesting that the basis of eye and color coordination was not discovered by an artist. Alongside of this, Hering’s opponent process theory is also interesting from an art minor perspective. The opponent process theory proposes that “color-sensitive cells were designed to respond to opposing pairs of colors (red-green, blue-yellow, and black-white). When discussing painting in art classes, we are reminded that these colors are opposite on the color wheel and have a nice contrast to each other. I had just assumed these opponent colors had been an idea of an artist, not part of psychologies history. The third thing I found interesting was Gall’s theory of “cranioscopy” and localization. The reasoning for Gall’s lifelong pursuit was quite comical but also very interesting. In comparison, I found Spurzheim’s idea of “faculties” to be interesting as well. Many magazines and books publish the same concept of these faculties, though in a more humorous manor, such as what the female and male brain are full of. However, these ideas, according to Spurzheim, are not far off. Alongside of these faculties, the doctrine of the skull coincides with these ideas. When discussing the shape and size of the skull and the relation to the strength of these faculties, Spurzheim believed these both were important in the importance of people. Today, there are a few people that still believe the shape of your head is in comparison to your knowledge, and from this section, I can understand why.
One thing I disliked about the chapter was the beginning few paragraphs. It was slow getting into and it was a struggle to want to continue to read, especially when the discussing the Renaissance and Newton. However, after a few paragraphs, the chapter became interesting and was much easier to read.
One thing I found in this chapter to be useful in understanding psychology was from a biopsychology perspective. If these figures of history had not discovered things such as involuntary actions, that the spinal cord was connected to sensation and movement, and the nature of the brain. When these theories were being formed, these historical figures were paving the way for others in the field of psychology. Understanding where the ideas for other psychologist to form their theories are important because these ideas are the basis and guidelines for the future.
One thing the chapter builds on is the idea of “multiples”: two people having the same or similar discovering in the same era. There are a few times mentioned in this chapter that has two historical figures theorizing about the same or similar ideas. For example, the Bell-Magendie law, where two people were completely unaware of each other’s discovers and both deserving credit. However, this example ended in a nasty discussion over priority.
After viewing the movie for Monday’s blog, I was constantly reminded of the thoughts and points made in that video. When the chapter discussed how the Enlightenment era was spread into the political arena and how the Constitution borrowed idea’s from Newton, I was reminded of the part of the video that discussed how America is run by a few elite members of society. In comparison, I was also reminded of this part of the video when the chapter discussed that Newton’s ideas of balance were borrowed when forming the three branches of government. This got me thinking of the video, and questioning if there was in fact an elite group of members running the government from behind, and these three branches of government were just a show for the rest of the country and world to make society believe American’s do hold a freedom of speech and government.
Terms used: guillotine, Helmholtz, trichromatic theory, Hering, opponent process theory, involuntary actions, multiples, Bell-Magendie law, Gall, cranioscopy, localization, Spurzheim, faculties, doctrine of the skull
One of the very first topics in this chapter having to deal with the functioning of the nervous system was very interesting to me. This section related back to chapter 2 because it connected the ideas of Descartes, and his development of the model of the nervous system and its functions, with later experiments done. People were really interested in the brain and nervous system because people who were injured in wars such as the European wars, and the American/French revolution often died. This was a time before much medical advancement there were no antiseptics or antibiotics at this point so they often used victims of head injuries as subjects for testing. The experiments done by Theodor Bischoff were really fun to read about. I think it is kind of part of human nature to be interested in death since it is so unknown to us. After reading about Bischoff’s study I was really intrigued. The way he studied the decapitated head of criminals was disturbing yet really cool.
The very next subject covered in this chapter, Reflex Action/ Bell-Magendie Law, was also very interesting. This topic was especially interesting to me because in my A & P II class right now we are studying reflexes so it is interesting to see where these findings came from. Just like work done by Bischoff, Whytt too studied reflex responses of decapitated subjects. He was more interested in the physiology and reason why things happened, not just solely whether or not they happened. He later published a book that provided the outcome of his research and showed the role of the spinal cord in reflexes. He later distinguished between voluntary and involuntary motion and saw how repetition and practice affects them. To further this study, along with Francois Magendie did follow up research and with his findings created the Bell-Magendie law which proves the functioning of the anterior and posterior roots of the spinal cord in sensation and motor movement. He then goes on to talk about sending nerve messages in single directions and from the way he describes this it makes me believe he is talking about upper and lower motor neurons and the way they are distributed throughout the body.
One last thing that I found interesting was the whole concept of phrenology. It may seem stupid, but I had never heard of this theory before and it fascinated me. The outlines of Phrenology and there 5 main principles seemed to be kind of common knowledge, but the way they diagramed each faculty made me wonder how they chose each position for each trait. As a whole this science reminded me of a palm reader. It all seemed kind of made up but back then, to many, it probably seemed genius. In the section the Marketing of Phrenology, we learned a bit more about Fowler and Wells Inc. This museum was really fun to read about, free admission but you have to pay to get your mind read. As I skimmed through a few titles of journals published by this couple I wondered why they were so interested about sex and relationships. Was this a big area of interest in the 1880's? Next it was very entertaining reading the diagnosis of the triple murderer this case just goes to show how people were desperate for information and would believe almost anything. Reading up on Flourens work was even more interesting after getting a small background on what was going on during this time period. I enjoyed reading about all of the research Flourens did and how he used ablation to disprove almost everything phrenology stood for.
One thing that I found to be the least interesting in this chapter was probably the section on Phineas Gage/Broca. Although the information itself is very interesting, I've learned about these cases many times so it was all review and I just skimmed over it all.
All in all I think that this chapter as a whole will be very important in understanding the history of psychology since it mostly dealt with findings on the brain. A few of the most important topics I can think of include Helmholtz and his studies on vision and audition, Flourens and ablation, and finally pretty much all of the information we learned that dealt with the anatomy and physiology of the brain. All of this early information will provide a solid base for expansion in later years. It is important to see where and how it all got started.
One topic that I would like to learn more about would be phrenology and its influence on society in the 1800's. I'm fascinated by this topic and like I stated before to me it seems silly that people accepted this theory so easily, it would be cool to dig deeper and see what effects phrenologists had on people.
One thought I had early on while reading about Bischoff and his research done on ex criminals was didn't he ever feel guilty studying these dead bodies? Didn't he ever feel any remorse or shame while preforming some of these studies? This study, as interesting as it was, seemed very unethical to me and I don't know how anyone could perform these tests on someone who passed away literally second before. Another thought that crossed my mind was how gullible were people who had their heads read by phrenologists? The research behind this theory was minimal and not valuable so I don't know how anyone would believe it.
Terms: Descartes and his development of the model of the nervous system and its functions, Theodor Bischoff, Reflex Action/ Bell-Magendie Law, Whytt, reflex responses, voluntary and involuntary motion, anterior and posterior roots of the spinal cord, phrenology, Fowler and Wells Inc., Flourens, ablation, Phineas Gage, Broca, Helmhotz.
Bre Gibbs
Chapter 3
One thing that I found interesting in this chapter was in the section about the nervous system and how they used executions to look at the nervous system and reflexes. I also think this section is interesting because we are just covering the 17th century and 18th century in my humanities class so this really sticks out. Scientist would look at decapitated soldiers because they would show arm and leg movements for a brief time. I think it was interesting and funny how they said that Joseph Guillotin and his invention was a marvelous improvement over large, hairy men with axes who were usually drunk. The test that Theodor Bischoff would run on the decapitated heads was interesting as well. He would act like he was going to poke the decapitated head; he would make the head smell salts, and would tell the heads that they had been pardoned. None of the heads would react to his tests. This is what lead to the study of reflexes in the body.
Another thing I think was interesting was how Robert Whytt studied reflexes. I am happy that he used frogs because I feel like all I ever hear is scientists studying mice and lab rats. Whytt would decapitate animals and was able to show that leg muscles responded in predictable ways to physical stimulations. When Whytt would pinch the leg of a frog that had been decapitated, it would produce a muscle contraction. When Robert Whytt would sever the connection between the nerve in the leg and the spinal cord, the leg would not contract. His studies showed that the spinal cord had a major role in the reflexive behavior in the body.
Another thing I find interesting about Robert Whytt is that he conducted similar experiments as Ivan Pavlov. Whytt just didn’t go to the extreme of the experiment as Pavlov did. Whytt just looked at what would make a person salivate or how a person would react before eating something sour like a lemon. Whytt wanted to show the formation of habits.
One thing that I didn’t find very interesting was the section about the speed of neural impulses. I didn’t find this interesting because we just talked about this in my biopsychology class. I don’t see how he got a accurate speed by isolating a motor nerve and a connected muscle from a frogs leg and stimulating the nerve electrically at several different distances from the muscle and recording the time it takes to stimulate a response.
I think a lot of the things I read are useful in this chapter because I can relate a lot of the material to my other psychology classes and even my humanities class which is interesting and makes reading it interesting. I think it also helps show how far we have come with science and technology to test many hypotheses in psychology and science.
One thing I would like to learn more is about is what exactly what all the parts of the brain does because it’s not all understood even still to this day. I think they have come a long way with the localized functions of the brain.
One thing I thought a lot about was my biopsychology class because right now we are talking about the neurons in the brain and the function of the parts in the brain.
Terms: Joseph Guillotin, Theodor Bischoff, Robert Whytt, and Ivan Pavlov.
The first thing I found interesting about this chapter was whether the brain was the center of human consciousness. People who had been decapitated would continue to have arm and leg movements for a few minutes after their death, but no one knew why. Bodies would continue to twitch momentarily after executions, and eye movements and facial twitches could be seen. Theodor Bischoff started doing tests on decapitated heads in order to figure out if consciousness remained after execution. If the consciousness did remain, a head should react to fingers coming towards the eyes or having smelling salts placed under their noses. Bischoff tried several tactics, including the ones above, but there was no reaction from any of the heads. Bischoff then concluded that consciousness must reside in the brain, and that when a head is severed, consciousness is also ended.
In our day in age, it is hard to imagine that any other part of the body could be in control of consciousness, but people then did not have the information and technology we have today. I think it its interesting to see how people went about discovering the things that we take for granted today. Bischoff worked with decapitated heads in order to conduct research, and this seems like an unpleasant task. He was able to discover where consciousness resides without having a functional MRI or any way of looking at brain activity other than outside reactions.
Another topic I found interesting was the discovery that reflexes are controlled by the spinal cord. Robert Whytt was the one who discovered this. He showed that decapitated frogs would have leg muscles that would respond in a certain way when stimulated. If the connection between the leg nerve and the spinal cord was cut, however, there would be no such response. This showed that the spinal cord was an important part of reflexive behavior.
This interests me because of the dedication it must have taken to discover this. You would need to first, procure animals to run tests on. Then you would have to decapitate the animals. You also need to find the nerve that runs from the spinal cord to the leg. Finally you need to stimulate the nerve in some specimens and cut the nerve in others. I imagine that it is not an easy task to locate the specific nerve in an animal as small as a frog. I wonder how much trial and error went in to this discovery.
The last part of this chapter I found interesting is the study of phrenology. According to phrenology, you could identify faculties located in the brain. This could tell you how smart a person was or what characteristics they may possess. The study was founded by Franz Gall. According to Gall, the brain is the organ of the mind. He also believed that the mind is made up of abilities called faculties, and each faculty is located in a specific part of the brain. Some people have more of a certain faculty than others, which will result in more brain tissue in that specific area. Because of this, the shape of a skull can indicate what faculties a person has the most of. This last part is known as the doctrine of the skull. This was the key in taking measurements. The shape and size of a skull would indicate the faculties that person had.
The phrenologists relied heavily on anecdotal evidence. This means that they looked for specific examples to support their case. They would also disregard evidence to the contrary. If, for example, a bump in a certain area means that a person is a thief, those who had the bump and were not thieves had simply not committed a crime yet, or had other faculties that counteracted this one. Other scientists discovered the flaws in their thinking, and began to disregard phrenology as a pseudoscience. The general population, however, loved it. There were phrenology shops all over Europe and the United States where people could pay to have their heads measured and be told what faculties they possessed.
I like the study of phrenology because it does seem to make sense for what was known at the time. We knew the brain controlled consciousness, so why couldn't different parts of the brain control different things? Since there were no MRI's or CAT scans, the scientists relied on observations. You couldn't cut someone's brain open and take out pieces to see what they did, so this was the next best thing. Phrenology became a part of pop culture, with people paying to have their heads measured. This reminds me of palm reading today. A person's palm has nothing to do with what they will accomplish in the future or what traits they may have, but people still pay to have their palms read.
The part of this chapter I found to be the least interesting was the section on measuring the speed of neural impulses. Herman Helmholtz did this by stimulating the nerve in the leg of a frog at different distances from the muscle. He then observed how long it took for the muscle to respond. The father the distance, the longer it took for the muscle to respond. This proved that nerve action required the movement of physical entities.
This section did not interest me very much because I am less interested in neural impulses. It doesn't really matter in my life how long it takes for a nerve to react to stimulation. I would rather read about phrenology or decaptitation, both of which are more interesting to me.
I would like to learn more about Theodor Bischoff. I want to know how someone ends up doing research on decapitated heads and what other research he did during his life. It seems like he worked a lot on consciousness, which interests me.
During this chapter I was really interested in most of the topics. During the perception section I thought a lot about experiments we did in science classes in high school about mixing colored lights, trichromatic theory, and the opponent process theory. I remember doing many of the experiments that were talked about in the book myself.
This chapter relates to other chapters and psychology in that it is all about continuing the discoveries about the human body and brain. The discoveries about synapses and consciousness led to future discoveries about mental illnesses and chemical imbalances. These chapters have all been about scientific discoveries, and these discoveries led to the creation of psychology.
Terms:
human consciousness, Theordor Bischoff, reflexes, Robert Whytt, reflexive behavior, phrenology, Franz Gall, faculties, anecdotal evidence, pseudoscience, speed of neural impulses, Herman Helmholtz, physical entities, trichromatic theory, opponent process theory
After reading chapter 3 I found a lot of things interesting. One thing I was interested by was the section about Sir Charles Sherrington and The Synapse. This chapter was interesting because Sir Charles Sherrington did not observe the gap between neurons visually, but rather he made a conclusion that there was a gap by thinking rationally. I think this is very interesting because it is amazing that by observing the dogs reflexes he could infer that their were synapses. His ability to observe that there were spatial summations in the dog. Another section in this chapter that was interesting to me was the one about reflex action. I have always found reflexes to be interesting so learning about the early observations of reflexes is good to learn about. The way that Whytt showed the importance of the spinal cord in reflexes is interesting. I think the way he figured it out is awesome because that is the way a child would learn. Just messing around with a dead frog trying to figure out what makes it function. I think early research on things is incredible because they had no previous information to go off of, just their own observations and instincts. I also liked how he talked about how voluntary movements, when used frequently can become similar to a reflex. It was also interesting how he observed that they could have conditioned reflexes that is similar to the ideas of Pavlov. The last thing I found interesting in this chapter was the section that talked about Phineas Gage. His accident was surprising to me. It seems like a miracle that he could survive such a long time after this type of accident. It was also amazing that he could still function after it. The accident changed his personality and made him a different person. All of this information on Gage is interesting and I would like to learn more about him.
I think the most useful thing I learned while reading this chapter was the observations that Whytt made. The information about the importance of the spinal cord on reflexes made a huge contribution to the field of psychology.
While reading this chapter I kept thinking about how difficult it would have been to come up with the ideas that have been discussed. The observations they made were awesome and forever changed the psychological field.
Terms: neurons, reflex, synapse, and spatial summations.
I find the topic of phrenology to be amusing. I know that these scientists were dead wrong, but they were onto something. Although we have since found that not every single process or thought has one specific spot on the brain with borderlines drawn around it, they were using the little evidence that they had to put together a possible explanation for why the brain acts as it does.
Around that time, Broca discovered that there was a specific part of the brain that was designated to speech, which may have sparked the idea that the brain is divided into small specified areas. They failed to account for brain plasticity, but it is mainly because the technology wasn't available to keep people alive following brain damage, so they couldn't see brain plasticity in action.
I don't like how the book said that the only reason why the philosophical and physiological aspects of psychology are two separate entities is because textbook publishers decided to divide it that way. I know that different methods for studying psychology appeal to different people, and that some people tend to be almost philosophers while others are nearly brain surgeons. This variation in the way people study psychology is beneficial to the discipline as a whole, for the same reason why different versions of history are beneficial to remembering history.
I will remember the studies on physiology, such as Whytt finding that the spinal cord is responsible for reflexes.
I am really interested in Lashley's maze studies, because it must have been very exciting to find evidence that the cerebral cortex works as a whole on complex tasks whereas some basic tasks are left to just one or two areas.
Terms: Phrenology, Broca, Brain Plasticity, Philosophical, Physiological, Whytt, Spinal Cord, Reflexes, Lashley, Cerebral Cortex.
Chapter three was full of information. I enjoyed reading it because it was enough information to be informative but not to in-depth to be boring. I really liked learning about the publishing of theories and then the text following up with how it was proven wrong or furthered. The first part of the reading really grabbed my attention. The period of enlightenment is so interesting to me. Even just the definition explains the entire chapter: to shed light on the darkness of ignorance. That is exactly what happened through out this period of time. The theories are intelligent, however, some are far fetched. If I could pick a time period to live in, this would be it! Things moved so fast and everyone was testing and questioning all information out there. Now I feel like people take for granted all the information we know. Figuring out the truth about the universe is a never ending process that should constantly be questioned.
The study of reflexes was also interesting to me. Descartes is a person that intrigued me in previous chapters so when it brought up the topic of furthering his model, I was instantly interested. Putting myself in this time period and thinking about deciphering from voluntary and involuntary movement would be hard. To think they learned this all on a frog model makes me appreciative of what we know and our technology. One reoccurring thought during this chapter was how much we take for granted with science. We complain about memorization or formulas when these guys did not have any resources we had. It also makes me realize what man is capable of. The understanding of invention really helped me understand how theories traveled and came about. Knowing that the printing press came out during this time helped me understand ideas and how they spread. It also made me think about how relevant one invention can be to history. For instance the Bell-Magendie Law, one was first because of the use of publication. The use of resources made this an important topic in history. Is anything really discovered if it is not published?
Helmholtz was a person that I found interesting throughout the chapter. The study on nerves is so technical and impressive that they could find that much information with out modern day technology is fascinating. The invention of the ophthalmoscope for the retina lead to the ablity to learn about the eye and its inter workings. I don’t know anything about the eye and its color receptors and I would like to learn more about it. It seems biology related but this chapter has made me realize how much science and psychology relate. The trichromatic theory has me dumbfounded. I also think it is not only interesting that someone has enough resources to discover something, but more interesting for the next person who challenges it. Herings for instance brings on the opponent process.
The topic I found least interesting would be the section on the methods. The author has all of these interesting in-depth theories and how they were furthered in future and then he puts in the methods. They only had a little amount of text and they almost could have been left out or integrated into other parts for better understanding. However, he than transitions into the Nervous system and behavior which then keeps you interesting. My favorite part besides the other three from this chapter is the discovery that the brain can be immersed in paraffin and then diced up for research. That is another topic I would like to learn more about, how do you go about discovering that?
Key terms: Enlightenment, voluntary, involuntary, Bell-Megendie Law, Helmholtz, ophthalmoscope, trichromatic theory, Herings, opponent process,nervous system, microscope,
While reading this chapter one thing that I found interesting was the section on phrenology. The reason this was interesting to me was because it started out as a legit way to read one’s character by studying the bumps that are present on a person’s head. So it started out as a legit science but then quickly moved into a type of pseudoscience that nobody really took seriously anymore. What makes this interesting to me was because even though it is now considered a worthless science it was still very valuable leaps in scientists’ exploration in studying how the human mind works.
The second thing I found interesting in this chapter was the story of Phineas Gage that was studied by John Harlow. I have heard brief talks about this event in history but the book expanded on it a little bit more. Basically what happened was Gage was working a railroad and mistakenly blew some gunpowder up causing him to have his tool, “tamping iron”, lodged in his skull. Gage somehow survived this and lived for 12 years with a radically altered personality and behavior. This was interesting because it shows an example of how a brain injury can completely change the personality of a person from respectable to a complete embarrassment.
The final thing I found interesting in this chapter was Karl Lashley and how he went about examining learning techniques in animals and how that was related to brain function in the cortex. I thought this was interesting because you take a physiologist and kind of bridge the gap between that and psychologist to form a cognitive psychology study. This is important in finding a connection to learning and brain damage so it was interesting to read about the rats and the mazes with different levels of cortex destruction in the rats.
One thing that I didn’t like in the chapter was the part about Helmholtz talking about perception. It wasn’t that it wasn’t an interesting topic; it was just kind of a bad realization about us. Here he talks about all the flaws we have with our vision and how if it were an instrument it would be broken. This is kind of a downer because it makes me wonder how much better off we could be if we had better sensory functions.
This chapter builds on other chapters because it takes the first two chapters which were kind of broad in a sense and now it is getting more narrow and more specific. By the end of the next few chapters I feel like it will be more and more on one topic rather than having multiple topics in a chapter.
One topic that I would like to learn more about would be the people who opposed phrenology in the first place before the nineteenth century. I kind of want to know who they were and what they were working on to help disprove this science and help further our understanding of the brain.
The only things I really thought about when I was reading this was how we’ve learned about phrenology in just about every other social science class I’ve ever taken, and just being in disbelief at how a man could live for 12 more years after having a rod shoved through his head.
Terms: Phrenology, pseudoscience, Phineas Gage, John Harlow, personality, behavior, Karl Lashley, learning techniques, brain function, cortex, cognitive, psychology, Helmholtz, perception, sensory functions.
The first thing that interested me in chapter three was The Bell-Magendie Law. This refers to a multiple where two or more people come up with the same research and results from different laboratories but in the same era. Magendie had a study on the posterior and anterior roots of the spinal cord. Bell did similar research around the same time but was not able to conclude what Magendie was able to. The two’s research complimented each other’s. Another thing I found interesting was The Marketing of Phrenology. I found it interesting that Orson Fowler and his sibling made money from examining head. Enough money that they were able to open their own museum. One of the last things I found interesting was Phineas Gage. It’s amazing that a missile could enter and exit a head but the person is not only alive, but could still function and converse with others! Though he survived the injury, he was never the same. Instead of a working man, he became rude and profane. Twelve years after the accident, Gage died.
Like I mentioned in another post, I did not like reading about animal cruelty. I know we have learned quite a bit from experimenting with animals but I do not like reading about it. I hated reading about Magendie doing surgery on a puppy. I realize this probably isn’t the best answer to what I found least interesting but it is my answer.
I would like to learn more about Phineas Gage. I’m not sure how much more there is to learn but it is fascinating to me that he managed to survive and live twelve more years.
In understanding psychology, it is good to know the history of physiology. I think it is important to know the function of the brain to understand the mind. This chapter really seemed to build on the previous chapters and gave more insight into psychology’s history.
The main two thought while reading this chapter were I am still terrified of taking biopsych and we should subject animals to cruelty for experiments.
Terms: The bell-Magendie, multiple, posterior and anterior roots of the spinal cord, Phernology, Orson Fowler, Phineas Gage, physiology.
While reading this chapter the first thing I found interesting happened to be when they discussed the guillotine. Through observations they discovered that even while the head was completely severed the body still showed movement. This led people to question whether the brain was the center of consciousness. They discovered in fact that it is the center of consciousness and that the muscle movement was just involuntary spasms. This is interesting to me because it just makes sense that the brain would be the center of consciousness because what other part of the body could possibly be responsible for that?
Another part of this chapter I found interesting was ablation discovered by Pierre Flourens and the clinical method developed by Paul Brocca. They are close to one in the same. However, what I found interesting about ablation was that they used animal brains and assumed that parts of the brain were similar to parts of the human brain. I am interested in learning how they discovered that animal brains were similar to human brains. I am also interested in learning how the clinical method has improved with time because it seems like a very controversial procedure.
The third topic I found interesting was on Phineas Gage. I had heard about his story before but it had never been discussed at length. I find it truly amazing that someone can live through that. I am interested in finding out more on his mental health. Although the experience was unfortunate it has helped transform theories on the brain, which in turn also helped out psychology.
I found this chapter to be for the most part pretty boring. There were a few things I was interested in but because it consisted of neurons and neural activity I thought this section was awful. The ideas I had in this chapter were first off how did these people come up with these theories? Second, why did no one throw a fit about testing on animals like people do now? And how did they come to the conclusion that pigeon brains had anything to do with human brains?
I am interested in learning more about ablation and the clinical method. I really would like to find out how far along the clinical method has come since then and what is required of someone to leave their brain behind for studies. Is there a medicine out their that can cure almost any damage that happens to the brain?
This chapter relates to the last one in that they both kind of discuss the nervous system. One chapter talks about it philosophically while the other discusses it psychologically.
Terms: Paul Brocca, Pierre Flourens, Ablation, Clinical Method, Psychology, Nervous System, Cortex, Philosophically, Psychologically, Center of Consciousness, Phineas Gage, Mental Health
I did not care for this chapter. Although this information may be interesting to some people, I am not one of them. I took Biopsychology and hated it. I much prefer the social aspects of psychology to the actual physical properties of the brain and nervous system. That being said, I do think this information is very important, but it holds no interest for me.
One part of the chapter that I liked was the part about the localization of the brain. I liked this section because we covered it in great detail in Biopsychology and it made more sense to me because of that. I also really liked this part because it relates to one of my favorite movies, Memento. In the movie, the localization of memory is addressed in a way that the general public can understand, but still enough to spark an interest in the subject. I like this section because it is not overly difficult. The main concept is trying to deduce what parts of the brain are responsible for which actions. The fancy term for this is the localization of function, which means “to what extent do the different locations in the brain correspond to different physiological and psychological attributes?” I like this part of the chapter because you do not necessarily need to know the complex inner-workings of the brain, but need to know the varying main areas of the brain to understand the different theories and ideas. The different theories regarding the localization of function are somewhat interesting, but start to lead into more complex ideas. The more complex the section got, the more I seemed to lose focus.
The second thing that I liked about the chapter was the story of Broca and “Tan.” I like whenever the book puts in little stories/anecdotes to make it more interesting. I studied Broca’s Area in Biopsychology as well. At that time, I did not truly understand the concept. I think that I was confused because in that class we focused on the inner-workings of Broca’s Area. However, while reading about Broca and Tan in the textbook for this class, I understand the concept quite well. Tan suffered from motor aphasia, which is characterized by an inability to articulate ideas verbally. Broca studied others who suffered from this same condition and was able to determine that language is localized in the left frontal lobe. I liked reading this part of the chapter because I realized that if I had known it for my Biopsychology class that I may have understood the concept better at that time.
While trying to recall a third part that I enjoyed, I remembered the section on reflexes. The only reason I liked this section was because it tied back into the previous chapter by presenting more information about the works and discoveries of Descartes. I am again amazed that this man was able to accomplish so much in one lifetime. I then began reading about Robert Whytt because that section led into the section about Whytt. I was surprisingly interested in his research. Whytt’s findings would by today’s standards be common sense. However, at the time these discoveries were very important. I enjoyed the section where Whytt would study decapitated animals to test muscle movement and physical stimulation. This was important because it showed that these movements happened independently from the brain.
I did not like reading about Phineas Gage. In every single one of my classes a section on Phineas Gage is taught in the same manner with the same information. I found the story of Phineas Gage interesting, but I am sick of hearing about him all of the time. I do like the fact that scientists today have greatly benefited from the research on the case of Phineas Gage. His case can never be replicated again and the information gathered was invaluable to the field of psychology. My reasons for not liking this section of the chapter have to do purely with overexposure to the subject.
The thing that I will take away from this chapter is that there are always going to be topics that I do not necessarily care for, but that does not make those topics any less important. I realized that Psychology is comprised of so many different disciplines. All are equally important, but none could truly be understood without understanding the mechanisms of the brain.
This chapter builds on the previous chapters in that it shows the natural progression of the science. The first chapter was “how should we look at science?” The second chapter consisted of philosophical pondering and questioning of things that had no answer. This chapter started to look at the physical mechanisms that may explain those questions raised in chapter two. The natural progression would be for the book to continue into how the philosophical questioning and the physiological examinations interacted to develop into the field of psychology as we know it today.
In all honesty, I do not wish to learn more about anything in this chapter. I feel like I have learned the perfect amount for what was necessary to learn in this chapter. I could lie and find something that I wish to study more, but I think it wise for me to realize that I do not have an interest in this area of psychology, that I learned the necessary information, and that I took some knowledge away with me.
Terms: Phineas Gage, motor aphasia, localization of function, reflex action, Robert Whytt
I'd like to say to start off that I was really not interested in reading this chapter. I looked and saw biology and immediately wanted to blow off the work. However, I stuck to it and found a few interesting topics.
I found it interesting that some of the great discoveries are taken for granted now. For instance, Theodor Bischoff who looked at people being beheaded to see if they could react to anything after there were pronounced dead. They actually conducted experiments to see if someone was alive after their head was chopped off because their body would sometimes twitch. When I first read this, I thought "well duh". Then I realized that back in that time, facts of today hadn't been discovered. It really made me think. A lot of the things that we see as facts that everyone should know were once great discoveries of their time. I was also slightly interested because I have an uncle with the last name Bischoff and am interested to see if there is any connection.
I also found Phrenology a bit interesting, but not for what phrenology is. I found the bit in the book interesting because the "scientists" behind the theories blindly followed their work. I also found it interesting because of how well the idea sold in the US. After phrenology was declared a pseudoscience, Gall and Spurzheim followed their theory so blindly that they couldn't be proven wrong no matter what. This ignorance just baffled me, especially coming from someone with a scientific background. But what got me the most out of this section of the reading was that the idea sold so well to Americans. I know I can be a little hard when seeing how people in the past fell for different things because I didn't live through it. But this seemed like a scam from the start. I'm very glad that phrenology isn't prevalent today. I'm also glad that people aren't selected on college placement and job placement by the size of their head. I could imagine something like that would come if the scientific world had backed the idea of phrenology.
Finally, my 3rd interesting thing from this chapter was learning about motor aphasia. A man named "Tan" completely lost the ability to speak and over time lost different motor ability. I found this really interesting because other parts of his brain were not damaged. I wondered what it was like for Broca to find this man who hasn't spoken for many years to be very coherent and discuss things (through different motions). This would have completely blown me away because I can imagine others believing that this man was mentally handicapped because he couldn't speak.
I think the most useful thing for me wasn't anything that I read, but the realization that I came to with peoples discoveries. I wrote about this in another paragraph talking about which things I found interesting. I had a better time understanding after I looked at some of the discoveries in the setting that they happened. I used the power of empathy to try to put myself in the time era of different discoveries in hopes to better understand the magnitude of importance to the scientific community. This new outlook will help me throughout the rest of this course.
I don't really have a topic that I would specifically like to read about, I just like reading this book because it makes things like biology more interesting. Instead of giving facts about people, I can read this book and actually understand the setting and outcomes of different experiments completed.
Terms: Theodor Bischoff, Phrenology, Pseudoscience, Gall and Spurzheim, Motor Aphasia, Broca.
The first thing that I found interesting about this chapter is its discussion of The Enlightenment. When we speak of this era, we (rightfully) hear about the many scientific discoveries of the time. But one thing we don't really think about is how these discoveries influenced the general mentality of the public. The fact that our own Constitution is a product of such thinking is fascinating-- we are influenced today by the Enlightenment in terms of scientific progress, yes, but also in the realm of politics. This is the reason we value objectivity in our daily pursuits as well as in our studies. Moreover, this appreciation of objectivity inevitably leads one seek advancements in all the sciences, and this is why psychology has become a prominent subject of scientific investigation.
Another thing that fascinated me was the discussion of "multiples"-- two or more scientists working separately and arriving at the same conclusions, oblivious to the others' studies. The fact that Bell and Magendie were both theorizing about parts of the brain controlling movement and sensation and Young and Helmholtz had their own version of "trichromatic theory" is remarkable. I love that the chapter built off of the discussion from other chapters- namely, the naturalistic and personalistic theories of history. Since more than one scientist is making the same discovery, instances of multiples would be support for naturalistic history: the discovery was a product of the times. Either way, it signals the, well, *natural* way history unfolds. One discovery leads to another, which sparks a new interest, a new idea, a new experiment, etc. etc. And progress is before us. It really is a beautiful process.
The last thing that struck me as particularly interesting is Helmholtz's problem of perception. Although human senses are remarkably sophisticated, there are still a lot of flaws that make that less than maximally economical. Regardless, we perceive with an accuracy that does not affect our routine lives. Helmholtz's explanation plays into the reality of the natural world the beliefs that we hold. We would not be able to move past our sensory limitations without our mind-- actually, we wouldn't be able to interpret any sensory stimuli. We are constantly navigating the world based on our past experiences, judgements, and preconceived notions of the way things ought to be. This isn't always a bad thing, of course, since we NEED unconscious inferences to effectively do anything. But remembering how potent our past experiences can be in shaping the way we see the present is a testament to keeping an open mind.
The least interesting section for me was the section on Whytt. For one, physiology (though inescapably and impossibly important) is one of the least interesting aspects of psychology. Additionally, this section mentioned Whytt's experiments, which involved decapitated frogs, which was not pleasant to think about.
I would like to learn more about Helmholtz's problem of perception. I would like to see how it relates to current cognitive and social psychological theories. From what I've read in this book, this is the first mention of perception in regards to sensation and the mind's interpretation.
One idea I had during this reading was during this chapter occurred during the discussion of ablation. The book mentioned the difference between pigeons without cerebellums and pigeons without cortexes, being that the pigeon without the cerebellum couldn't fly and the one without the cortex wouldn't think to try. This made me wonder-- what if we all have the ability to do far more than has ever occurred to us? And not in some cheesy, motivational poster kind of way-- but perhaps we really do have capacities beyond our own understanding. Depending on how science progresses, we may discover these, unless... we *all* have this conceptual "blind spot". Hmmm...
Terms: Newtonian, multiples, naturalistic, personalistic, Bell, Magendie, movement, sensation, Young, Helmholtz, trichromatic theory, problem of perception, unconscious inference, phrenology, Whytt, ablation
RB
As I was reading through chapter 3, one of the first topics that really caught my attention was that of the section about Robert Whytt and his findings on reflections. In studying decapitated frogs, Whytt would pinch the leg of a recently deceased frog and would witness a muscle contraction. In doing this, he was demonstrating the predictable ways that leg muscles would respond to stimulation in dead animals. Whytt was able to determine that the spinal cord plays an essential role in reflex behavior. He also later distinguished the difference between voluntary and involuntary actions.
Another part of this chapter that I found interesting was that of the story of Phineas Gage in the phrenology section of the chapter. I mean, I do think it is kind of strange that people believed that a person’s character could be read by feeling the bumps on one’s head. But I understand how at that time it could have been considered to actually work, seeing as they didn’t have the technology that we have today. The story of Phineas Gage caught my attention because I thought it was bizarre how the tampering iron completely altered his personality. Before the accident, Gage was an admired town leader and foreman. After the accident, he turned into a profane and irresponsible member of the community. I thought it was weird how this case turned into an example of phrenology’s cerebral localization.
I think this chapter relates to the previous chapter in that both of the chapters have to deal with the early founders of both fields. Chapter 2 had to do with the education and learning processes. This chapter had more to do with the human body.
Of the topics presented in this chapter, I think the one I would like to learn more about the Bell-Magendie Law. That was one of the topics that I didn’t really understand as well as I should have.
Terms: Robert Whytt, muscle contractions, Phineas Gage, phrenology, cerebral localization, Bell-Magendie Law
I really enjoyed reading this chapter. I thought the most interesting part was the information about Helmholtz and his work on trichromatic theory and color vision. I find it amazing that he was able to isolate the nerves and the processes that allow us to see color, the eye is such a delicate part of the human anatomy; Helmholtz must have had to work so precisely to dissect the nerves of the eye in order to draw his conclusions. His surgical abilities must have been incredible; I never realized that some of the doctors of the 19th century were so skilled. Helmholtz was something of a genius, but the circumstances of his life almost kept him from the greatness which he did finally achieve. He had a love for physics and excelled in high school. Helmholtz found a way to rise beyond his economic class level, and pursue his dreams. The text states that Helmholtz only went to medical school because his family could not afford to send him to college. He took advantage of a program which the German government offered – he received a full scholarship to medical school with the agreement that he would serve in the military for 8 years after graduating. Our own government offers the same type of incentive programs today.
The second thing in this chapter which I found interesting was the controversy between Bell and Magendie. They both studied reflexology and share credit for a discovery concerning the reflexive reactions of spinal cord nerve roots and motor reaction versus sensation. While Bell seemed to have made remarkable progress in the field (he documented his findings 11 years before anyone else), Magendie took the work to the next level, and actually made a breakthrough discovery concerning the different nerves roots which controlled movement and sensation. The text made it seem that a bitter argument followed Magendie’s publications regarding his findings, and Bell used his great political influence in an effort to discredit Magendie. Bell’s initial contributions had some inherent flaws, probably because he did not conduct the in-depth experiments that Magendie undertook. Instead of applauding Magendie for his work, Bell became derisive and accused Magendie of animal cruelty and plagiarism. There is no way of really knowing whether or not Magendie had heard of Dr. Bell’s work and thus expanded upon it, or if this was truly a case of a multiple discovery (11 years between is a long time); but, I do believe that Magendie deserved the most if not all of the credit for his efforts, and Bell’s name is only attached because of the obvious power he must have wielded with politicians. I love controversy!
The third thing about this chapter which I found interesting was another controversy between Golgi and Cajal. Again, there were two scientists making remarkable strides toward understanding the inner workings of the human brain, and they shared a Noel Prize for their achievements. Golgi had laid some groundwork, which was eventually discredited. The text tells us that Cajal graciously offered credit to Golgi for pioneering the ideas which led to Cajal’s breakthroughs. Still, Golgi was anything but gracious about Cajal’s more intensive and accurate representation of how neurons worked together. Imagine if these scientists had worked together? What great strides could have been made in research? Instead, they fought and sniped at each other like high school kids fighting to be crowned as prom queen.
The part I found least interesting was the curious story of Phineas Gage, mostly because it was not detailed enough about what really happened with Mr. Gage. I researched Gage (briefly) outside of the readings to learn more about his outcome. I learned that the rod that went through his head was tapered on one side and that may have served to clear a path of least resistance through the brain, minimizing the damage. The doctors attending Gage reported seeing brain matter exiting the wound at different points in time on the day of the injury. Dr. Harlow, who ultimately attended Gage, only worked with him until Gage became physically well enough to go home to his parents. The notes he made were from the first year or two post injury. Gage went on to live another 11 years, and reportedly did have other jobs in his life. Gage was reported by his family to be unruly and unfocused, and hard to deal with, much like we observe many brain injured people today. Gage died after having increasingly violent seizure activity in the last year of his life. Dr. Harlow did not have the luxury to study Gage’s brain until after he had been dead and buried for awhile. Gage’s body was exhumed, and only then was an autopsy done. It is too bad that an autopsy was not performed at the time of death. I think it was too bad that Gage had not been followed by physicians more closely in his life; I believe that a lot of critical information was missed from this golden opportunity.
I believe this chapter builds on the previous one by going more into the physiology of the human mind, and the processes that scientists have gone through in order to be able to understand what we know to this point in time. I was very intrigued with this chapter and I want to do more research into the early testing done to learn about the brain. I could not help but wonder what other tests were done which are not revealed in this chapter. The chapter focuses more on animal testing and observations of humans who had suffered injuries to the brain, but I would have to suspect that there were probably some researchers out there testing on healthy humans. Most of us have heard about eugenics testing in Nazi Germany, but were there any earlier tests done (in any nation) on people who were considered “disposable”? That is what I would like to spend more time researching.
Terminology:
Helmholtz, Magendie, Bell, trichromatic theory, Golgi, Cajal, neuron theory, Phineas Gage, Harlow, brain injury, autopsy, eugenics, animal testing, Nazi Germany
I meant "Nobel Prize", of course :)
BR
In chapter three one topic I found interesting was the section about Phineas Gage. I’ve always enjoyed learning about him and his crazy story; it never seems to amaze me. I find it amazing how he only lost consciousness just for a little bit then walked to the doctors office like nothing had happened. The most intersting part about his case, especialy back then, was how this accident completely altered his personality. He used to be energetic and respected before his injury, however; after the damage to his left frontal cortex his personality and behavior were altered. He became mean, irresponsible, stubborn, and an embarrassment. It’s interesting how he survived without having any antibiotics to help treat infection and keep the wound clean. It’s also surprising how he recovered so quickly and could live independently, but with the limit of not being able to work. Phineas Gage’s brain injury led John Harlow to be able to do research on him though and help learn more about the brain and what areas affect us in a psychological manner.
The part of this chapter about Paul Broca was another interesting topic to me. His patient talked about in the book is called “Tan” and he had been living in a hospital for 21 years. Why Broca took interest in him was because he was healthy, and intelligent but he lost his speech due to having severe gangrene. Through studying Tan’s condition he discovered that he had motor aphasia. He studied more patient like Tan and he concluded that our speech ability is located in the left frontal lobe. This is interesting because this would have been a huge achievement back in the day to be able to localize what the areas of the brain affect what abilities we have.
The guillotine topic of this chapter interested me and also kinda freaked me out a little. I know some animals still move when their heads get cut off but the fact that humans can also is wicked. It’s really interesting how the bodies of those that were beheaded still moved or twitched as well as the facial muscles and eye movements afterward. These occurences made Theodor Bischoff question if we still had consciouness after being decapitated. His tests concluded that lost consciousness occured the moment the head was severed. These decapitations added to learning about the brain as well as muscle movements and made relexes and the spinal cord studied more to try to answer why/how this was happening.
I think the most useful part of this chapter in understanding the history of pscyhology would be how a lot of the scientists worked off eachothers discoveries to extend the knowledge of what was being studied. They also questioned eachother’s work, which challenged them to keep experimenting and researching as well as coming up with justifiable data. This is important because it laid the groundwork for progessing and striving to learning more about the mind today.
This chapter builds off the first two chapters because it is going in chronological order and it’s building off the the ideas and findings of pscyhologists and scientists in the first two chapters. In this chapter for instance, Decartes was mentioned again for reflexes but in less depth because it was showing how his findings and how Whytt also made a significant contribution to reflexes after Decartes.
I would like to learn more about is cases of people with brain injuries like “Tan” or Phineas Gage. I’ve always found topics like that interesting and how their injuries have affected them phsyically, mentally, and emotionally.
When reading the section about the decaptations and the Guillotine I wondered if the people back then ever really cared or questioned it themselves if the executions were humane. In today’s society the death penalty is not in affect in every state and it’s an ethical confliction sometimes and its questioned, but did people ever back in the day question if they should be executing for if they should be in person for life, or did they just not really care?
Phineas Gage, left frontal cortex, Paul Broca, left frontal lobe, Theodor Bischoff, guillotine, consciouness, psychologists, Decartes, reflexes, Whytt
First off, I enjoyed reading about the Enlightenment period because it was a step into creative thinking freedom. The introduction of random ideas in science began to become more accepted as it hadn’t before, with the Church’s influence. I think some began to realize that in order to advance technologically and in knowledge, they would have to begin accepting new ideas. The Church was still an important part of their lives, but I think they wanted to know the truth about some things in the world. I believe that by scientists providing good evidence to the public, they discredited a lot of the Church’s influence. I thought it was interesting that the book describes the Enlightenment period as shedding “light on the darkness of ignorance.” Obviously this was true, but I just think there were a lot more “Enlightenment” periods following. Some people will never discontinue being ignorant to the real world and other people’s ideas; which is also interesting because the book describes scientists as, “simply looking for the truth without imposing their values in any way.” I think this is true of scientists as a whole, and I feel that it provides us with a chance to have a greater respect for them. This is probably one of the reasons their ideas gained credit easily during this period and in the future.
Another thing I liked from this chapter was Helmholtz’ work with visual concepts, more specifically, the visual concept that is color vision. His trichromatic theory reminds me of simple activities we did during early education. Our teachers would let us play with colored flashlights and “mix” the colors on the wall, therefore creating new colors. Because this was so new to us, we were amazed at the effect. I think the most important aspect of his theory was that he believed we actually perceived a color with our eyes rather than see what is actually there before us. The primary colors, red, green, and blue, were the main focus of these studies; any could be mixed to create a color outside of them (which probably led him to his theory that we perceive color). I thought it was interesting that one of his theories’ problems dealt with blindness (i.e. a person with severe red-green color blindness could still not see yellow).
A person who stood out to me this chapter was Franz Josef Gall, whose brilliant ideas on phrenology were not even considered by the church, or antireligious. For this, he was not given a religious burial. His greatest discovery, I think, was when he confirmed the concept of contralateral function. I’m not sure how many different science, career, or psychology teachers have given me a “right brain, left brain” quiz. The results of the quiz are to tell one whether they are right brained (creative, emotional), or left brained (cognitive, logical). This relates to his ideas in that he believed that each side of the brain controlled a different side of the body. I’m not sure I believe that either, because there are people who possess both qualities.
Terms: Enlightenment, Church, scientists, Helmholtz, visual concepts, color vision, theory, primary colors, perceive, Franz Josef Gall, phrenology, contralateral function, science, psychology