 |
|
Diagram Makers or Classical Neurologists?
The Interactions of Aphasiology and Its History
José G. Merino, MD, MPhil
Arch Neurol. 2001;58:1494-1497.
|
|
| Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings. |
|
|
|
INTRODUCTION
This essay sets out to examine some aspects of the interaction between
a scientific discipline and its history. The study of the history of medicine
has more than heuristic and didactic purposes; it can help physicians settle
contemporaneous controversies. In scientific debates, history writing plays
an important role in the process of discipline formation. This essay explores
the ways in which the study of historical figures helped shape the clinical
theories of Henry Head and Norman Geschwind and examines their reassessments
of the contributions of earlier participants in the field of aphasiology.
Although Head and Geschwind worked in different eras, they were both very
interested in the history of neurology. By relying on neglected writings of
earlier neurologists to explain their clinical findings and to support their
own theories of aphasia, they used history to enrich their own clinical work.
They turned to history writing . . . [Full Text of this Article]
HENRY HEAD
NORMAN GESCHWIND
CONCLUSIONS
From the Department of Clinical Neurological Sciences, University of
Western Ontario, London Health Sciences Centre, London, Ontario. Dr Merino's
current affiliation is the Department of Neurology, University of Florida–Shands
Jackson, Jacksonville.
Corresponding author: José G. Merino, MD, MPhil, Department
of Neurology, University of Florida Health Sciences Center, 655 W Eighth St,
Jacksonville, FL 33209 (e-mail: Jose.merino@jax.ufl.edu).
|
