These files are maintained strictly for historical reference, research, and recordkeeping purposes,
and the content has not been altered or updated since archiving.
Content on this site may not meet current digital accessibility standards.
If you require an alternative, accessible format of any information found on this site,
please contact Bruce Jones, bjones@ucsd.edu to request an accommodation.
These files are maintained strictly for historical reference, research, and recordkeeping purposes,
and the content has not been altered or updated since archiving.
Content on this site may not meet current digital accessibility standards.
If you require an alternative, accessible format of any information found on this site,
please contact Bruce Jones, bjones@ucsd.edu to request an accommodation.
Andy, Footnote 23 in Rees' article addresses this point: 23. On conceptual continuity as a feature of 20th-century neurology, see Hagner 2006b, specifically, pages 9, 34–38, 170–179, and 205–209. For general accounts of 20th-century neuroscience, see Albright et al. 2000 and Cowan et al. 2000. On Jun 25, 2012, at 1:06 AM, Andy Blunden wrote: > How a discipline can maintain a fiction about its own object of study whilst outside the discipline people know it is a fiction. I am presuming it has a lot to do with the sociology of science and the status of the various sciences. But I will see if I can find something. __________________________________________ _____ xmca mailing list xmca@weber.ucsd.edu http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca