Minds behind the Brain: A History of the Pioneers and Their Discoveries

by Stanley Finger

Attractively illustrated with over a hundred halftones and drawings, this volume presents a series of vibrant profiles that trace the evolution of our knowledge about the brain.
Beginning almost 5000 years ago, with the ancient Egyptian study of "the marrow of the skull," Stanley Finger takes us on a fascinating journey from the classical world of Hippocrates, to the time of Descartes and the era of Broca and Ramon y Cajal, to modern researchers such as Sperry. Here is
a truly remarkable cast of characters. We meet Galen, a man of titanic ego and abrasive disposition, whose teachings dominated medicine for a thousand years; Vesalius, a contemporary of Copernicus, who pushed our understanding of human anatomy to new heights; Otto Loewi, pioneer in
neurotransmitters, who gave the Nazis his Nobel prize money and fled Austria for England; and Rita Levi-Montalcini, discoverer of nerve growth factor, who in war-torn Italy was forced to do her research in her bedroom. For each individual, Finger examines the philosophy, the tools, the books, and
the ideas that brought new insights. Finger also looks at broader topics--how dependent are researchers on the work of others? What makes the time ripe for discovery? And what role does chance or serendipity play? And he includes many fascinating background figures as well, from Leonardo da Vinci
and Emanuel Swedenborg to Karl August Weinhold--who claimed to have reanimated a dead cat by filling its skull with silver and zinc--and Mary Shelley, whose Frankenstein was inspired by such experiments.
Wide ranging in scope, imbued with an infectious spirit of adventure, here are vivid portraits of giants in the field of neuroscience--remarkable individuals who found new ways to think about the machinery of the mind.

Genres: Science, Neuroscience, Nonfiction, History, Psychology, Brain, Medicine

384 pages, Hardcover

First published December 15, 1999

Reviews

[Kamakana · Rating 3 out of 5]

020114: neuroscientist friend gave me this book to read, as introductory survey text on the brain, university level. though much seems familiar to me, i do not know where i had read some ideas before. as history, necessarily, it is biographical, but as my father is a scientist, that this human project of science is that of varied people and societies does not surprise me. there are moments while reading this book, that you are using the very organ explored to read about itself, seems very ironic. your brain on your brain. or rather your mind on your brain. if you do not follow it- you know what is at fault...

for though it is extensive, it only briefly refers to philosophical problems and then only to skip by them- primarily Descartes and the interaction of mind and matter, thought and action. there is great explication of over two thousand years of thought on thought, several hundred years of scientific experimentation, theory, argument, but this would be another book- of philosophy- that addresses these other issues. and who knows if the 'shut up and calculate' mindset of quantum physics is here in force, for current neuroscientists. there are a few latter sections that recall clearly certain theories, such as the split-brain of Sperry, which encouraged one of my artist aunts to give me a book called The New Drawing on the Right Side of the Brain, she was probably worried my artistic urges were being diminished by living in scientific materialist household! ah, such were my adolescent years, but always already more inspired by science than intimidated or ignoring that way of being...

[Jake · Rating 3 out of 5]

A popular book was written by one of the premier historians of brain science. This book separates the history of neuroscience into chapters that elaborate upon a brief biography and explanation of the works of the various neuroscientists, and neurologists who helped found the discipline.

I think this is a very good book for someone interested in some of the main theories which undergird modern neuroscience, and how those theories form a sort of historically developmental web of ideas.

I found this book useful as I have been attempting to make my way through the writings of these individuals such as the works of Eccles, Sherrington, J.H. Jackson, Charcot.. and this book at least helped me put some of these figures into the perspective of a discipline and how its disciples are connected.

Recommended for those interested in the history of neuroscience

[Aaron · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book is a grab bag. The real star is the science. Finger wrote another text on the history on Neuroanatomy, and I don't know how that compares to this one. I give Minds Behind the Brain three stars just because it does a good job braiding the science with the history. If he left it at that, this might be a five star book. However, there are three things that really detract from the work.

First, he can't seem to decide whether he's writing a biography or history book. Each chapter is more or less written on a single important person in neuroscience, such as Sherrington, Broca, or Vesaluis. But rather than being a brief biography, it's a hodgepodge of historical context, biographical snippets, and significant scientific contributions. You never have the feeling of central narrative telling a story, and the information is sometimes focused and sometimes erratic and winding.

Second, Finger's writing style is really longwinded and often tedious. For example, from the chapter on Sherrington:
"Upon returning to London, he [Sherrington] told Ruffer what had happened [saving a boy's life with untested antiseptic medicine]. The two ecstatic physicians ran off to tell Lord Lister, a strong supporter of such work. At Lister's residence they were stopped by a butler, who informed them that his master was entertaining some surgeons from the Continent [Europe]. They scribbled a note that was delivered to the famous promoter or antisepsis. After Lister read the note, the doors flew open and Sherrington and Ruffer were invited to join the guests for dinner. Lister told those present that, to the best of his knowledge, this was the first time diphtheria antiserum had been used to save a life in Great Britain. The evening was a joyous affair and nobody seemed particularly bothered by the fact that the two unexpected guests were not properly dressed for the occassion."
It makes you wonder just who he had in mind for his audience. Jane Eyre? The way the tone shifts between semi-aristocrat and awkward casual just doesn't work for me. I don't think that either tone really belongs in a history or science book, and the combination probably doesn't belong anywhere. Furthermore, it leads me to question the overall quality of his research. What exactly are the hard facts and what is the artistic license? Footnotes are strewn about, but I have to wonder how much detail Finger went into with the research. I would be amazed if he found documentation for the mood at this dinner party, but that doesn't mean he didn't actually research that. My complaint is that it's not clear what's substance and what's style. Regardless, the overall writing style detracts from the focus and pleasure of the book, against his own efforts.

Finally, while I assume that he has his facts in order and has done the research to back up his writing, I don't like this kind of matter-of-fact history telling. Finger writes history like he's reading a book, as though our contemporary theories are the obvious and more so necessary product of the inevitability of science and research. In short, he tells the myth of progress. Arthur Koestler and Jacklyn Duffin have written at length about the problem with this kind of history telling. It's a naive view that promotes naive thinking. Finger pays some attention to false starts and straying paths in the history of neuroscience, but it's always from the (assumed) enlightened perspective of the 21st scientist.

Finger had an interesting idea: to organize his history of neuroscience around important personalities. It's a novel idea and was a convenient way to highlight the historical setting for each "generation" of scientists. Great in conception, weak in execution. If you want a good text to get started reading history or medicine, try Duffin's History of Medicine: A Scandalously Short Introduction. She does what this book aims for, even though she covers a different subject matter.

[Javelin Hands · Rating 5 out of 5]

The amount of information in this book is staggering. The author must have put in a tremendous time commitment, and i think it pays off.

This is an info dense text that contextualizes scientific discovery with history and biography. We take so much of discovery for granted, but Finger clearly has a deep appreciation for the field and all it includes.

The final chapter of this book ties everything together exquisitely and offers a remarkable message of hope and excitement for what lies ahead in science. Fuck yeah.

[Johanna · Rating 4 out of 5]

I just finished reading this book for a paper I am writing and it actually turned out to be an interesting read. The historical aspect behind the brain and its controversial role in determining who we are was described in an entertaining way. Though I wouldn't recommend this for everyone, it would be a good book for a history buff especially one who is interested in science.

[Courtney · Rating 4 out of 5]

I have a minor in neuroscience, and one of my professors recommended this to me to read. Very interesting if you are interested in the human brain and the people who have contributed to what we know about the brain to present day.

[Shane · Rating 3 out of 5]

Encyclopedia style. Plenty of details per page. Surprised by treatment of Don Carlos' head injury by laying the corpse of Diego d'Alcala next to the bed.

[Joseph Hirsch · Rating 3 out of 5]

There are certain areas of research where, once the spadework is done, a number of laws and parameters can be clearly defined. Newtonian gravity is one. We know how things fall, start, stop, and accelerate, based on some calculations (calculations, which a mathematic illiterate like me cannot perform.)
There are other areas, though, where not only each leap forward necessitates another, but sometimes evidence is encountered which forces scientists to start over. There’s something they need for their calculations, something they know exists, but which they can’t apprehend exactly. Say, “dark matter” in astrophysics.
The grey matter in the brain isn’t quite that mysterious, but Stanley Finger’s Minds Behind the Brain shows there is still much work to be done. And perhaps some that needs redoing, too.
The book’s goal is stated in the introduction, in which the author says he wishes to create an accessible history for the general public on the history of brain research. More importantly, he wants to balance his description of the scientific advances against the lives and personalities of the men and women doing the advancing.
He partially succeeds, especially in those instances where he shows scientists forced to argue against more established dons and chaired doctors. Some of course picked bigger fights, with the Church and State.
He starts at the beginning, where doctors who were also hierophantic quacks treated brain injuries with panaceas as varied as crocodile dung and poisoned poultices. Things advanced then to Galenic humoral theory. For a long time the wisest polymaths believed the literal heart to be the locus of consciousness. That started to change, though, as war and injury showed that men who took wounds to the head sometimes spoke and behaved in strange ways.
Study was inhibited for centuries due to taboos about tampering with the dead, and surgery moreover being in a crude state. Eventually humans began to use animals for testing (despite protests from various humanists and simply kindhearted people who didn’t understand why they must suffer). Phrenology, while regarded now as a parlor trick, at least helped focus research on specific portions of the brain controlling certain functions, which is more than can be said for smearing oneself with crocodile dung.
Cartesian theories also helped focus the mind of researchers, presenting the human as a sort of clockwork mechanism, and the brain inside as a clock within the clock, like a nesting Matryoshka.
At last, electrical impulses and the release of various chemicals (counteracted or inhibited by precisely concocted drugs) started to pull the shadow veil back from the mind. There is still much work to be done—and that may always remain the case. The Manichean view of people being “left-brained” or “right-brained” is only slightly more scientifically valid than horoscopy. It’s a nice shorthand for thinking about hemispheric function and division, and actually holds true for some basic functions. But mind, soul, psyche, or consciousness—call it what you will—remain elusive, and both left and right halves possess redundancies and vestiges supposedly executively controlled by their opposites.
Not only that, but new neural pathways can be laid down in what appear to be arbitrary ways. Sometimes when we retrain our brains figuratively, we literally rewire it. That doesn’t mean Jordan Peterson or your local preacher can talk you out of senility or Parkinson, but it does hint at heretofore-unexplored linkages between mind, matter, and grey matter.
But again, these are just hints, a trail of breadcrumbs the Good Lord or Nature or the Spaghetti Monster left to keep us occupied until the Rapture or meteor impact.
Still, that the mystery remains is no reason to be discouraged. The work done here over the centuries—sometimes in the face of dangerously vehement opposition—is inspiring and fascinating in its way.
My only complaint is that the author is not much of a stylist and sometimes fails to enliven his description of the researches with commensurately enlightening passages about the scientists. That’s a matter of opinion, though. Moreover, it’s an opinion proffered by a guy who spent a lot of his childhood holding his breath until he passed out, out of boredom.

[Garrett Boatman · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is the best book I've found on the history of discoveries concerning how the brain works. Of particular interest to me were the chapters on Descartes Mind-Body Problem, Galvani's experiments with electricity on the brain, and Ferrier's mind-blowing attempts to map the cerebral cortex. A great resource for anyone interested in the development of our understanding of neurology and consciousness. I discovered this book during my research in the effects of electricity on the brain and localization, or Victorian mapping of the brain.

[Zach · Rating 4 out of 5]

Read for class

[Ryan Bruno · Rating 4 out of 5]

Great read. Very interesting. I only wish that it was organized in a way that highlighted the ideas and discoveries of the time rather than having every chapter devoted to a particular discovery. I also wish he would have connected the circumstances of the pioneers’ time to there discoveries more thoroughly. A few chapters leave some science and history to be desired.