2000 HSS/PSA Program 1 - History of Science Society
2000 HSS/PSA Program 1 - History of Science Society
2000 HSS/PSA Program 1 - History of Science Society
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
<strong>HSS</strong> Abstracts<br />
discussions surrounding the conceptual foundations <strong>of</strong> biology, questions <strong>of</strong><br />
development were at the core <strong>of</strong> all theoretical systems proposed in those decades.<br />
In this paper I will discuss the importance <strong>of</strong> development in the formulation <strong>of</strong><br />
theoretical biology and the central role <strong>of</strong> developmental processes in the<br />
rhetorical arguments for the independence <strong>of</strong> biology from physics and chemistry.<br />
I will analyze how the increased popularity <strong>of</strong> neo-vitalistic arguments in the<br />
wake <strong>of</strong> Driesch’s popularization <strong>of</strong> these ideas led to the emergence <strong>of</strong> theoretical<br />
biology as a search for alternatives to the age old mechanist-vitalist divide.<br />
Specifically, I will show how certain key concepts that emerged in the context<br />
<strong>of</strong> experimental research programs, such as Hans Spemann’s organizer, Alexander<br />
Gurwitsch’s morphogenetic field, Ludwig von Bertalanffy’s organismal systems,<br />
or Oskar Vogt’s eunomic series were incorporated into conceptual systems about<br />
the foundations <strong>of</strong> biology. I will also show how these conceptual developments<br />
were enabled by the organizational efforts <strong>of</strong> a small number <strong>of</strong> people (Julius<br />
Schaxel, Wilhelm Roux, Vladislav Ruzicka, Adolf Meyer-Abich among others)<br />
who controlled and established various series <strong>of</strong> monographs and scientific<br />
journals and actively promoted the idea <strong>of</strong> theoretical biology.<br />
116<br />
André␣ R. LeBlanc CIRST, Université du Québec à Montréal<br />
On Negative Hallucinations and the Origins <strong>of</strong> the Unconscious<br />
This paper examines a little-known debate over the nature <strong>of</strong> negative hallucinations<br />
in the late 1880s France. Negative hallucination is the phenomenon by which an<br />
object is rendered invisible to a hypnotic subject. The study <strong>of</strong> negative hallucination<br />
produced one <strong>of</strong> the earliest arguments for the existence <strong>of</strong> the unconscious. Through<br />
a series <strong>of</strong> intricate experiments, investigators like the philosopher Pierre Janet<br />
(1859-1947), the psychologist Alfred Binet (1857-1911) and the physician<br />
Hippolyte Bernheim (1840-1919) showed that subjects were somehow still able<br />
to see the invisible objects that they could not presumably see. Janet seemed to<br />
solve this mystery by demonstrating, in 1887, that a dissociated consciousness<br />
saw the invisible objects without the subject’s main consciousness knowing it.<br />
This was the first experimental application <strong>of</strong> the concept <strong>of</strong> dissociation, which<br />
was introduced the preceding year, in 1886, and which has become so prominent<br />
in recent years with the epidemic <strong>of</strong> multiple personality disorder, renamed<br />
dissociative identity disorder in 1994. Dissociation (then as now) seemed the only<br />
way <strong>of</strong> explaining the phenomenon. In 1889, however, the Belgian philosopher<br />
and psychologist Joseph Delboeuf (1831-1896) began arguing in favour <strong>of</strong> a<br />
sophisticated form <strong>of</strong> simulation and against state theories <strong>of</strong> hypnosis. His work<br />
undermined the then burgeoning theory <strong>of</strong> the unconscious and, as this paper will<br />
show, is still relevant to current debates over the nature <strong>of</strong> hypnosis and allied<br />
mental disorders. More specifically, I believe Delboeuf indirectly demonstrated<br />
that the concept <strong>of</strong> dissociation could never be proven and I will give a book prize<br />
to the first person who shows that I am wrong.