Advertisement

BioSocieties

, Volume 14, Issue 1, pp 67–93 | Cite as

Social Brains: On Two Neuroscientific Conceptions of Human Sociality

  • Laurence Anne TessierEmail author
Original Article

Abstract

Based on an ethnographic comparison between a US clinic and a French clinic, both specialized in the diagnosis of neurodegenerative diseases, this article describes two different understandings of the pathology of the social brain. From the diagnosis of frontotemporal dementia (FTD), I describe the variabilities in local knowledge and practices, and I analyze the relationships they have to different historicities and to an assemblage of judgements and values connected to ideas about the social being. I first describe how the neurologists in the American clinic highlight the loss of emotion, care, and empathy in FTD symptomatology, whereas in the French clinic, it is the loss of motivation, will and élan vital which particularly catches their attention. I further inquire into how these two 'clinical styles' are historically connected to specific modes of description of the frontal lobe pathology, which outline and presuppose particular figures of the social and of the individual: one, in the American context, that indexes a valorization of social mimetism, whereas the other, in the French context, is guided by a desire for freedom and resistance.

Keywords

Frontotemporal dementia diagnosis Comparative ethnography Neurosciences The individual Social mimetism Empathy 

Notes

Acknowledgements

My deepest thanks to the patients and to the medical team at the Memory Clinic without whom this work could not have come into being. I am indebted to the Wenner Gren foundation for anthropological research and to the Fondation Plan Alzheimer for supporting this inquiry. I am also grateful to Anthony Stavrianakis, Bharat Venkat, and three anonymous reviewers at BioSocieties, for their criticisms and suggestions.

Ethical Approval

This study is subjected to ethical review.

References

  1. Adolphs, R., D. Tranel, and A.R. Damasio. 1994. Impaired recognition of emotion in facial expressions following bilateral damage to the human amygdala. Nature 372 (6507): 669–672.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Absher, J., and F. Benson. 1993. Disconnection syndromes. An overview of Geschwind’s contributions. Neurology 43 (5): 862–867.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Ballenger, J. 2006. Self, Senility and Alzheimer’s disease in Modern America: A History. Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Bechara, A., H. Damasio, D. Tranel, and A.R. Damasio. 1997. Deciding advantageously before knowing the advantageous strategy. Science 275 (5304): 1293–1294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Benson, F. 1993. The history of neuropsychiatry and behavioral neurology. Neurologic Clinics 11 (1): 1–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Benton, A. 2000. Exploring the History of Neuropsychology, Selected Papers. Oxford USA: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Bergson, H. 2013. [1938] La pensée et le mouvant. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.Google Scholar
  8. Biess, F., and D.M. Gross. 2014. Science and Emotions After 1945. A Transatlantic Perspective. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Boakes, R. 1984. From Darwin to Behaviourism, Psychology and the Mind of Animals. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  10. Boller, F. 1997. Frontal Lobe Syndrome. In Behavioral Neurology and the Legacy of Norman Geschwind, ed. Steven C. Schachter, and O. Devinsky. Philadelphia: Lippincott-Raven.Google Scholar
  11. Brossard, B. 2013. Jouer sa crédibilité en consultation mémoire. Les personnes âgées face à une évaluation cognitive. Sociologie 4: 1–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Brunnström, H., L. Gustafson, U. Passant, and E. Englund. 2009. Prevalence of dementia subtypes: a 30-year retrospective survey of neuropathological reports. Archives of Gerontology and Geriatrics 49 (1): 146–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Canguilhem, G. 2008. Knowledge of Life. New York: Fordham University Press.Google Scholar
  14. Canguilhem, G. 1998. Ideology and rationality in the history of life sciences. University of Michigan: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  15. Candea, M. 2016. De deux modalités de comparaison en anthropologie sociale. Traduit de l’anglais par Franck Lemonde, L’Homme 2016/2 (No 218), 183–218.Google Scholar
  16. Chamak, B., and B. Moutaud. 2015. Neurosciences et société. Paris: Armand Colin.Google Scholar
  17. Citton, Y. 2010. Le style comme filtre. Économie de l’attention et goûts philosophiques. Critique 1 (752–753): 24–35.Google Scholar
  18. Cohen, L. 2006. Introduction: Thinking about Dementia. In Thinking About Dementia: Culture, Loss and the Anthropology of Senility, ed. A. Leibing, and L. Cohen, 1–20. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Cohn, S. 2008. Petty Cash and the Neuroscientific Mapping of Pleasure. Biosocieties 3 (2): 151–163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Damasio, A. 2006. Descartes’ Error: Emotion, Reason and the Human Brain. London: Vintage Books.Google Scholar
  21. Damasio, H., T. Grabowski, R. Frank, A.M. Galaburda, and A.R. Damasio. 1994. The return of Phineas Gage: Clues about the brain from the skull of a famous patient. Science 264 (5162): 1102–1105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Di Pellegrino, G., L. Fadiga, L. Fogassi, V. Gallese, and G. Rizzolatti. 1992. Understanding motor events: a neurophysiological study. Experimental Brain Research 91: 176–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Dimitrov, M., M. Phipps, T. Zahn, and J. Grafman. 1999. A Thoroughly Modern Gage. Neurocase 5 (4): 345–354.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Dumit, J. 2003. Is it me or my brain? Depression and neuroscientific facts. Journal of Medical Humanities 24: 35–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Dumit, J. 2004. Picturing Personhood: Brain Scans and Biomedical Identity. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  26. Ehrenberg, A. 2004. Le sujet cérébral. Esprit, Novembre, 130–155.Google Scholar
  27. Ehrenberg, A. 2008. Le Cerveau “social”: Chimère épistémologique et vérité sociologique. Esprit, Janvier, 79–103.Google Scholar
  28. Ehrenberg, A. 2009. The Weariness of the Self: Diagnosing the History of Depression in the Contemporary Age. McGill: Queen’s University Press.Google Scholar
  29. Eslinger, P.J., and A.R. Damasio. 1985. Severe disturbance of higher cognition after bilateral frontal lobe ablation patient EVR. Neurology 35 (12): 1731–1741.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Feuerhahn, W. 2013. Instituer les neurosciences sociales. Quelle histoire pour un nouveau label?, in Le mental et le social, Bruno Ambroise et Christiane Chauviré (eds). Paris: Editions de l’EHESS.Google Scholar
  31. Fitzgerald, D., and F. Callard. 2015. Social science and neuroscience beyond interdisciplinarity: Experimental entanglements. Theory, Culture & Society 32 (1): 3–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Fitzgerald, D., N. Rose, and I. Singh. 2016a. Revitalizing sociology: urban life and mental illness between history and the present. The British Journal of Sociology 67 (1): 138–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Fitzgerald, D., N. Rose, and I. Singh. 2016b. Living well in the neuropolis. The Sociological Review Monographs 64 (1): 221–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Forest, D. 2015. Neuroscepticisme. Les sciences du cerveau sous le scalpel de l’épistémologue. Montreuil-sous-bois: Ithaque.Google Scholar
  35. Fox, P. 1989. From senility to Alzheimer’s disease: The rise of the Alzheimer’s disease movement. The Milbank Quarterly 67 (1): 58–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Habib, M., and M. Poncet. 1988. Perte de l’élan vital, de l’intérêt et de l’affectivité (syndrome athymhormique) au cours de lésions lacunaires des corps striés. Revue neurologique 144 (10): 571–577.Google Scholar
  37. Habib, M. 1998. Apathie, aboulie, athymhormie: vers une neurologie de la motivation humaine. Revue de neuropsychologie 8 (4): 537–586.Google Scholar
  38. Harlow, J.M. 1868. Recovery from the passage of an iron bar through the head. Publications of the Massachusetts Medical Society, no 2, 1868, p. 327–347. Source available in Macmillan, M. (2002). An Odd Kind of Fame: Stories of Phineas Gage. Cambridge (Massachusetts.): MIT Press.Google Scholar
  39. Heilman, K., F. Boller, and A. Damasio. N.d. History of the Society for Behavioral and Cognitive Neurology. http://the-sbcn.org/1743.cfm, accessed June 5th 2016.
  40. Iacoboni, M. 2009. Imitation, empathy, and mirror neurons. Annual Review of Psychology 60: 653–670.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Kandel, E.R. 1999.. Biology and the future of psychoanalysis: A new intellectual framework for psychiatry revisited. American Journal of Psychiatry 156(4):505–524.Google Scholar
  42. Langlitz, N. 2012. Neuropsychedelia: The Revival of Hallucinogen Research since the Decade of the Brain. Berkeley: University of California Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Laplane, D. 1990. Is” loss of psychic self-activation” an heuristic concept? Behavioural Neurology 3 (1): 27–38.Google Scholar
  44. Laplane, D., and B. Dubois. 1998. Les troubles affectifs de la perte d’auto-activation psychique: comparaison avec ceux de l’athymhormie. Revue neurologique 154 (1): 35–39.Google Scholar
  45. Latour, B. 1990. Quand les anges deviennent de bien mauvais messagers. Terrain 14: 76–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Lefève, C. 2008. La lecture épistémologique de la psychologie de Maine de Biran par Georges Canguilhem. In L’envers de la raison. Broussais, Canguilhem, Foucault, Daled P. F. (éd.), Annales de l’Institut de philosophie de l’Université de Bruxelles, Paris, Vrin, 35–52.Google Scholar
  47. Leys, R. 2007. From Guilt to Shame. Auschwitz and After. Princeton (NJ): Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  48. Leys, R. 2011. The turn to affect: A critique. Critical Inquiry 37 (3): 434–472.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Lhermitte, F. 1983. ‘Utilization behaviour’ and its relation to lesions of the frontal lobes. Brain 106 (2): 237–255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Lhermitte, F. 1986. Human autonomy and the frontal lobes. Part II: patient behavior in complex and social situations: the “environmental dependency syndrome. Annals of Neurology 19 (4): 335–343.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Lhermitte, F., B. Pillon, and M. Serdaru. 1986. Human autonomy and the frontal lobes. Part I: Imitation and utilization behavior: A neuropsychological study of 75 patients. Annals of Neurology 19 (4): 326–334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Lock, M. 2013. The Alzheimer’s Conundrum: Entanglements of Dementia and Aging. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Luauté, J.P., and O. Saladini. 2001. Le concept français d’athymhormie de 1922 à nos jours. The Canadian Journal of Psychiatry 46 (7): 639–644.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Malabou, C. 2012. The New Wounded: From Neurosis to Brain Damage. Translated by Steven Miller. New York: Fordham University Press.Google Scholar
  55. Matusall, S. 2013. Social behavior in the “Age of Empathy”?—A social scientist’s perspective on current trends in the behavioral sciences. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience 7: 236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Mercy, L., J.R. Hodges, K. Dawson, and R.A. Barker, C. Brayne. 2008. Incidence of early-onset dementias in Cambridgeshire, United Kingdom. Neurology 4(19):71.Google Scholar
  57. Neary, D., J.S. Snowden, L. Gustafson, et al. 1998. Frontotemporal lobar degeneration: a consensus on clinical diagnostic criteria. Neurology 51: 1546–1554.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Neary, D., J.S. Snowden, and D. Mann. 2005. Frontotemporal dementia. Lancet Neurology 4: 771–780.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Ochsner, K.N. 2007. Social cognitive neuroscience: Historical development, core principles, and future promise. In Social Psychology: A Handbook of Basic Principles, ed. A. Kruglanksi, and E.T. Higgins, 39–66. New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
  60. Pachet, P. 1993. Un à un: de l’individualisme en littérature (Michaux, Naipaul, Rushdie). Paris: Seuil.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Parot, F. 2013. Entre causes mentales et causes sociales. Une impossible psychologie du citoyen en France. In le social et le mental. Paris: Éditions de l’EHESS.Google Scholar
  62. Parvizi, J., and A. Damasio. 2003. Neuroanatomical correlates of brainstem coma. Brain 126 (7): 1524–1536.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Papoulias, C., and F. Callard. 2010. Biology’s gift: interrogating the turn to affect. Body and Society 16 (1): 29–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Rascovsky, K., J.R. Hodges, D. Knopman, M.F. Mendez, J.H. Kramer, J. Neuhaus, J.C. van Swieten, H. Seelaar, E.G. Dopper, C.U. Onyike, A.E. Hillis, K.A. Josephs, B.F. Boeve, A. Kertesz, W.W. Seeley, K.P. Rankin, J.K. Johnson, M.L. Gorno-Tempini, H. Rosen, C.E. Prioleau-Latham, A. Lee, C.M. Kipps, P. Lillo, O. Piguet, J.D. Rohrer, M.N. Rossor, J.D. Warren, N.C. Fox, D. Galasko, D.P. Salmon, S.E. Black, M. Mesulam, S. Weintraub, B.C. Dickerson, J. Diehl-Schmid, F. Pasquier, V. Deramecourt, F. Lebert, Y. Pijnenburg, T.W. Chow, F. Manes, J. Grafman, S.F. Cappa, M. Freedman, M. Grossman, and B.L. Miller. 2011. Sensitivity of revised diagnostic criteria for the behavioural variant of frontotemporal dementia. Brain 34(9): 2456–2477.Google Scholar
  65. Ratnavalli, E., C. Brayne, K. Dawson, and J.R. Hodges. 2002. The prevalence of frontotemporal dementia. Neurology. 58(11), 1615–1621.Google Scholar
  66. Rees, T. 2016. Plastic Reason: An Anthropology of the Effort to Think the Adult Human Brain in Embryogenetic Terms. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  67. Rizzolatti, G., and L. Craighero. 2004. The mirror-neuron system. Annual Review of Neuroscience 27: 169–192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Rose, N. 2003. Neurochemical selves. Society 41: 46–59.Google Scholar
  69. Rose, N. 2007. The Politics of Life Itself: Biomedicine, Power, and Subjectivity in the Twenty-First Century. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Rose, N. 2013. The human sciences in a biological age. Theory, Culture & Society 30 (1): 3–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Rose, N.S., and J.M. Abi-Rached. 2013. Neuro: The New Brain Sciences and the Management of the Mind. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Strohminger, N., and S. Nichols. 2015. Your Brain, Your Disease, Your Self. August 23, 2015, The New York Times.Google Scholar
  73. Stroud, B. 1965. Wittgenstein and logical necessity. The Philosophical Review 74 (4): 504–518.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Tessier, L. 2017a. A flavour of Alzheimer’s. Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute 23 (2): 249–266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Tessier, L. 2017b. Seeing a Brain through an Other: The Informant’s Share in the Diagnosis of Dementia. Culture, Medicine and Psychiatry 41 (4): 541–563.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Vidal, F. 2002. Brains, bodies, selves, and science: Anthropologies of identity and the resurrection of the body. Critical Inquiry 28: 930–974.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Vidal, F. 2005. Le sujet cérébral: une esquisse historique et conceptuelle. Psychiatrie, sciences humaines, neurosciences 3 (11): 37–48.Google Scholar
  78. Vidal, F. 2009. Brainhood, anthropological figure of modernity. History of the Human Sciences 22 (1): 5–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Wolff, F. 2010. Notre humanité. D’Aristote aux neurosciences. Paris: Artheme Fayard.Google Scholar
  80. Young, A. 2012. The social brain and the myth of empathy. Science in Context 25 (3): 401–424.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Macmillan Publishers Ltd., part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Centre d’étude des mouvements sociauxEHESSParisFrance

Personalised recommendations