Talk:History of neuroscience

Neuroscience High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Neuroscience, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Neuroscience on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.NeuroscienceWikipedia:WikiProject NeuroscienceTemplate:WikiProject Neuroscienceneuroscience articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

History of Science High‑importance

	History of science portal This article is part of the History of Science WikiProject, an attempt to improve and organize the history of science content on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. You can also help with the History of Science Collaboration of the Month.History of ScienceWikipedia:WikiProject History of ScienceTemplate:WikiProject History of Sciencehistory of science articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Psychology Mid‑importance

	Psychology portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Psychology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Psychology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PsychologyWikipedia:WikiProject PsychologyTemplate:WikiProject Psychologypsychology articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Medicine: Neurology Start‑class Low‑importance

	Medicine portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine articles
Start	This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Neurology task force (assessed as Mid-importance).

Anatomy: Neuroanatomy Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Anatomy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Anatomy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AnatomyWikipedia:WikiProject AnatomyTemplate:WikiProject AnatomyAnatomy articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article has been classified as relating to neuroanatomy.

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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) [[[User:Gleng|Gleng]] 15:31, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

Agree with Sayeth's proposal. --Arcadian 17:05, 9 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Moved "History" and "Modern neuroscience" to Neuroscience article. Sayeth 17:01, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

Moved. Famousdog (talk) 13:26, 4 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

Be bold

good source

Finger, Stanley (2001-10-11). Origins of Neuroscience: A History of Explorations into Brain Function. Oxford University Press. ISBN 9780195146943. Retrieved 15 August 2012.

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

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]