Thomas Sydenham

Uma observação das narrativas sobre a história da histeria revela que nem sempre aqueles que as elaboraram levaram em consideração o aspecto fundamentalmente
historiográfico da proposta, tomando inferências como se fossem fatos históricos. Esse deslize originou narrativas que não deveriam ser classificadas como história, mas, mais apropriadamente, como mitologias. Com frequência, a trajetória da histeria começa na medicina egípcia, segue em um continuum por Hipócrates, pelas bruxas da Idade Média, pelos vapores do Iluminismo, até chegar à Salpêtrière, a Charcot e, em seguida, a Freud. Porém, do ponto de vista historiográfico (e evitando o anacronismo), este curso pode não ser tão seguro. O artigo revê essa trajetória e propõe que a história da histeria implicaria dois estágios, separando-se a histeria doença do útero da histeria neurose. Uma ponte entre as duas concepções teria sido estabelecida por Thomas Sydenham, em 1682, no Epistolary Discourse to the Learned Dr. William Cole.

The observation of the narratives on the history of hysteria reveals that those who elaborated them did not always take into account the fundamentally historiographical aspect of the proposal, taking some inferences as historical facts. This slip gave rise to narratives that should not be classified as history, but rather as mythologies. The historical path of hysteria often begins in Egyptian medicine, follows a continuum through Hippocrates, the witches of the Middle Ages, the vapours of Illuminism, the Salpêtrière, Charcot and then Freud. However, from a historiographical point of view, (and avoiding anachronism), this path might not be so safe. This paper reviews that trajectory and proposes that the history of hysteria would unfolds in two stages, distinguishing hysteria, disease of the uterus, from hysteria, a neurosis. A bridge between the two conceptions would have been established by Thomas Sydenham, in 1682, in the Epistolary Discourse to the Learned Dr. William Cole.

Peter Anstey’s book 'John Locke on Natural Philosophy' (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011), presented an interpretation of Locke’s work on science and medicine, and how this shaped his philosophical views. It was wide-ranging in scope and often impressively detailed. It raised a number of questions about Locke’s relationship to the work of J. B. van Helmont, his collaboration with Thomas Sydenham, and the overall chronology and trajectory of his natural philosophical interests. It also occasioned a number of questions about methodology in the history of philosophy and how we should construct an interpretation of a thinker like Locke from the published, manuscript and historical records available. It is welcome that Anstey should address some of these questions in some ‘Further Reflections on Locke’s Medical Remains’. This paper will address those answers that Anstey chose to provide, as well as some matters he chose to pass over, and conclude with a broader review of Anstey’s approach.

RESUMO Este texto tem por meta analisar um conjunto documental pouco explorado referente às pesquisas do médico Raimundo Nina Rodrigues sobre fenômenos coletivos registrados entre o final do século XIX e inicio do XX. Pretendemos dar ênfase a algumas reflexões do referido autor e, especialmente, ao diálogo que ele estabeleceu com profissionais estrangeiros do campo da sociologia, da antropologia e da saúde mental. O esforço intelectual de Nina é como um testemunho do nascimento de um campo de estudos cujas primeiras linhas estavam sendo traçadas no Brasil: a psicologia das massas ou loucura das multidões. Nina resgata uma rica tradição de estudos para abordar, à sua maneira, casos de epidemias coletivas e religiosas no Brasil, vinculadas à população negra e mestiça. Palavras-chave Nina Rodrigues – multidões – loucura – religião – miscigenação. ABSTRACT This text is aimed to analyse an underexplored set of documents related to the research referring to the physician Raimundo Nina Rodrigues on collective phenomena recorded between the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. We intend to emphasize some reflections of that author and especially the dialogue which he established with foreign professionals in the field of sociology, anthropology and mental health.Ninàs intellectual effort is like a witness of the birth of a field of study whose first lines were being drawn in Brazil: crowd psychology or the madness of crowds. Nina rescues a rich tradition of studies to address, in its way, cases of collective and religious epidemics in Brazil, linked to the black and miscegenated population. Keywords Nina Rodrigues – crowds – madness – religion – miscegenation. Introdução É possível afirmar que Raimundo Nina Rodrigues foi um dos primeiros intelectuais brasileiros a, sistematicamente, teorizar e formular hipóteses sobre o campo da chamada Psicologia das Multidões. Esse aspecto foi apontado, pela primeira vez pelo médico Arthur de Araújo Pereira Ramos (1903-1949) no prefácio do livro As collectividades anormais, coletânea de textos de Nina Rodrigues, reunida pelo primeiro em 1939: Nina Rodrigues, já apontado como o iniciador dos estudos de etnografia e psicologia social do negro, no Brasil, já conhecido como estudioso de nossos problemas de raça e de cultura, aclamado como uma das autoridades em criminologia e ciência penal.... talvez não fosse lembrado, pela nossa pobre ciência nacional, tão esquecida dos precursores, como um dos pioneiros do movimento da psicologia coletiva. No entanto o seu nome fora apontado pelos estudiosos europeus, como um dos fundadores da psicologia das multidões, um dos criadores da psicologia gregária, normal e patológica, ao lado dos Rossi, dos Si

The observation of the narratives on the history of hysteria reveals that those who elaborated them did not always take into account the fundamentally historiographical aspect of the proposal, taking some inferences as historical facts. This slip gave rise to narratives that should not be classified as history, but rather as mythologies. The historical path of hysteria often begins in Egyptian medicine, follows a continuum through Hippocrates, the witches of the Middle Ages, the vapours of Illuminism, the Salpêtrière, Charcot and then Freud. However, from a historiographical point of view, (and avoiding anachronism), this path might not be so safe. This paper reviews that trajectory and proposes that the history of hysteria would unfolds in two stages, distinguishing hysteria, disease of the uterus, from hysteria, a neurosis. A bridge between the two conceptions would have been established by Thomas Sydenham, in 1682, in the Epistolary Discourse to the Learned Dr. William Cole.

mercoledì 2 -giovedì 3 settembre 2015 Fondazione Collegio San Carlo via San Carlo, 5 -Modena Fondazione Collegio San Carlo XXIV ConVegno nazIonale deI dottoratI dI rICerCa In FIlosoFIa MERCOLEDÌ 2 SETTEMBRE 2015 ore 9-11 · sala dottorato FilosoFia e teorie della conoscenza tra umanesimo ed età moderna

The clinical empiricism of Thomas Sydenham (1624–1689) and his definition of especie morbosae represented a substantial turn in the medicine of his time. This turn supposed the shift towards an ontological conception of diseases, from a qualitative to quantitative interpretation. Sydenham’s clinical proposal had a great influence on empiricism philosophical thinking, particularly in John Locke and his delimitation of knowledge. The dialogue between medicine and philosophy, set out by Sydenham-Locke, reactivates the problem of the clinical and theoretical foundations of medical thought, as well as the limits of scientific knowledge. Similar to problem exposed in the Hippocratic treatise On ancient medicine, seventeenth-century medicine seeks its epistemological foundations and the solution to its difficulties in clinical experience, probability and analogy. The aim of this work is to show the Sydenham’s contribution to one of the great controversies between medicine and philosophy.