دانلود کتاب از عکاسی تا fMRI – کارکردهای معرفتی تصاویر در تحقیقات پزشکی درباره هیستری

In early 2011, while browsing the internet, I accidentally came across the online version of a New York Times article titled “Is Hysteria Real? Brain Images Say Yes.”1 At that point, I too held the view that continues to dominate the humanities literature. According to this view, hysteria was “written out of current medicine” during the twentieth century.2 It thus had no “place in the serious reaches of contemporary science.”3 But Erika Kinetz, the author of the article published in September 2006, challenged this widely accepted view, claiming instead that hysteria was still among us. Importantly, Kinetz pointed out a largely neglected fact—since the turn of the twenty-first century, there has been a resurgence of medical studies that use images to investigate hysteria. Yet, interestingly enough, in the humanities, the old image of hysteria, which sees this age-old illness as a mere myth, still holds. For example, writing in 2004, the art historian Amanda du Preez has argued that hysteria “manifests exclusively through visual appearances and images and is reproduced in imitations and representations. Since its aetiology is fantasmatic, hysteria has no anatomical or corporeal basis. As a result, the condition can be described as a simulacrum of symptoms.”4 By contrast, Kinetz offered a different take on hysteria.