Talk:History of neuroscience

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 23 January 2019 and 10 May 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Austincross44, Natecham. Peer reviewers: GladL, Mtj522.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 23:38, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Discussion from Talk:Brain
I've been considering whether or not to move the "History" section to the article Neuroscience, since the section is more concerned with the history of the study of the brain (and the nervous system), rather than of the brain itself. Any thoughts or objections? Sayeth 18:08, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
 * I really like that Idea Sayeth. I also think it would be good to remove the "modern neuroscience" section and maybe incorporate it to the neuroscience article. This section is a bit pointless since it really is a very selective description of a few of the neuroscience techniques in use today. Nrets 13:08, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Agree with both of these, well definitely Nrets, but needs some thought about what this article is really about, because the History section is the best part of this article. I agree strongly with Fyslee about Modern neuroscience section, and even more so about the section on study of the brain. To be honest, there isn't clarity apparent about exactly what this article is trying to do. I would suggest that Neuroscience should be the main introductory article about the study of the brain, and this article should refer on to that for an overview. I also think this article is too heavy on neuroanatomy (refer on to article on neuroanatomy) Gleng 15:31, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Agree with Sayeth's proposal. --Arcadian 17:05, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Moved "History" and "Modern neuroscience" to Neuroscience article. Sayeth 17:01, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

I felt that this was a off move, e.g. doing a search for "brain history" does not connect me to neuroscience. Hence, I started a history mini-article (with see:History of the brain links attached) for both brain and neuroscience.--Sadi Carnot 11:01, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

Eurocentric View point
Especially in the Early Views section, it only talks about what the Western Views and history were. What about the Eastern ideas? Or the Central and Southern African? Or Mesoamerican views? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.173.72.116 (talk) 15:52, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Strange title
I find the title "History of the Brain" very strange. Wouldn't "history of theories/study/etc of the brain / brain function / etc" make more sense? Of course, then you'll get the dualists and monists (or anti-dualists or whatever they're called) piling on. Perhaps as mentioned this really should be part of an article on history of the neurosciences more generally. EEng (talk) 12:04, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Seconded. "History of the brain" is a totally stupid and nonsensical title, for what seems to be a history of research into the brain. I would suggest History of neuroscience. Famousdog (talk) 13:22, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Moved. Famousdog (talk) 13:26, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Rene Descarte
It mentions Rene Descarte but stops there. I don't remember much off the top of my head, but I do remember he thought the pineal gland was the connection between the body and mind. Someone can include that I guess. Grouphug (talk) 10:30, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Improving completeness
(This is the first time I plan to heavily edit an article, so please bear with me.)

I found this timeline from PBS to be much more complete than the this Wikipedia article. http://www.pbs.org/wnet/brain/history/1911.html?position=375?button=27 I plan to add this info to this article. I'll need to look at the copyright issues of the PBS info.

My concerns as a new editor is that my edits will be taken down. I am concerned that I will spend much time on these edits, only to see them disappear. Help from experienced editors will almost certainly be helpful to me.

geek84 (talk) 20:51, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Be bold

good source

 * This page needs help BE BOLD J8079s (talk) 02:42, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

21st century?
We're 16 years into it! I'd sure like to see some info about what's happened in the field since 2001. --tgeller (talk) 18:07, 9 May 2017 (UTC)

Source showing evidence for distinction of twentieth century from modern period
http://ukcatalogue.oup.com/category/academic/history/era.do Whalestate (talk) 00:07, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Important neurophysiologists to consider.
I made a list of neurophysiologist that may be added in future editions. Jan Swammerdam (1637 – 1680) Giovanni Battista Beccaria (1716 – 1781) Leopoldo Marco Antonio Caldani (1725–1813) Alessandro Volta (1745 – 1827) Giovanni Aldini (1762 – 1834) Carlo Matteucci (1811 – 1868) Claude Bernard (1813 – 1878) Friedrich Goltz (1834 – 1902) Ludimar Hermann (1838 – 1914) Julius Bernstein (1839 – 1917) Francis Gotch (1853 – 15 July 1913) George J. Burch (1852 – 1914) Keith Lucas (scientist) (1879 – 1916) Edgar Adrian (1889 – 1977) Gcastellanos (talk) 16:54, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

Keith Lucas and Edgar Adrian
I plan on adding information related to Keith Lucas and Edgar Adrian to the twentieth-century section of this article. Both of them were active in neuroscience study, particularly in the action of nerve cells and sensory organs. My initial edit is going to be small, but I will expand upon it in the future.Austincross44 (talk) 23:03, 8 March 2019 (UTC)

Neuroscience in Islam
I intend on adding a section about the contributions made by Islamic neurologists around the middle ages. There were a lot of major contributions from them around the middle ages that are in the article currently. I am going to start adding the Islam section. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Natecham (talk • contribs) 19:12, 18 March 2019 (UTC)