Re: Animal Spirits to Molecular Mechanisms
Carl, Apparently referring to my forthcoming book in April of "A History of Nerve Functions: From Animal Spirits to Molecular Mechanisms"(CUP), you discuss, and append the email of Andrew Lautin that questions Brazier's view that the microscopical evidence given by Remak in the 1830's that the axon has a semisolid core was a turning point in the demise of the concept of animal spirits. Remak's contribution was blunted by the vigorous opposition of Valentin and Purkinje who believed the axonal content to be fluid, one that circulates in closed loops of the fiber with a separate adjoining cell body supplying the motive force. Only later, toward the end of the 19th century, did Remak's view of the axon as semisolid, arising from the cell body as an "early neuron doctrine," become vindicated when further evidence for the neuron doctrine became overwhelming. With respect to whether it was Galvani who really turned people away from [the belief] in animal spirits, Galvani's work at the end of the 18th century did initiate that change but his influence was set back by Volta's discovery of metallic voltage that appeared to explain Galvani's results. Galvani actually equated animal electricity with animal spirits, calling it the long sought-for agent of nerve action. It was Matteucci in the 1840's and then more importantly Du Bois-Reymond who in the 1860's gave convincing evidence for the electrical nature of the nerve impulse and that sounded the death knell of the concept of animal spirits. The concept of animal spirits with its roots in primitive thought, formulated in ancient Greek philosophy and science, passed through a long series of attempts to replace it with various physical and chemical entities and agencies until at last it was finally recognized as an electrical process. Regards, Sid Ochs