Christfried Jakob’s 1921 Theory of the Gnoses and Praxes as Fundamental Factors in Cerebral Cortical Dynamics

This study aims at reviving an important contribution by the pioneer neurobiologist and neurophilosopher Christfried Jakob (1866–1956) to the understanding of higher cortical functions. Jakob studied cortical dynamics at multiple levels by comparing gnoses and praxes and their corresponding pathological states, i.e. the agnosias and the apraxias. We herein provide a complete English translation of Jakob’s original Spanish article dating to 1921, and further consider some key points under the scope of the neuropsychological knowledge available then, and the research evidence available 90 years later.     

Christfried Jakob's late views (1930-1949) on the psychogenetic function of the cerebral cortex and its localization: culmination of the neurophilosophical thought of a keen brain observer

This article follows the culmination of the scientific thought of the neurobiologist Christfried Jakob (1866-1956) during the later part of his career, based on publications from 1930 to 1949, when he was between 64 and 83 years of age. Jakob emphasized the necessity of bridging philosophy to the biological sciences, neurobiology in particular. Thus, we consider him as one of the early protagonists in the emergence of neurophilosophy in the 20th century. The topics that occupied his mind were the foundations for a future philosophy of the brain, and the 'neurobiogenetic', 'neurodynamic', and 'neuropsychogenetic' problems in relation to how consciousness emerges. Jakob's views have many elements in common with great thinkers of philosophy and psychology, including Immanuel Kant, William James, Edmund Husserl, Henri Bergson, Jean Piaget and Willard Quine. A common denominator can also be discerned between Jakob's dynamic approach and certain aspects of cybernetics and neurophenomenology. Jakob propounded the interdisciplinarity of sciences as an indispensable tool for ultimately solving the enigma of consciousness.     

'Does Broca's area exist?' Christofredo Jakob's 1906 response to Pierre Marie's holistic stance

In 1906, Pierre Marie triggered a heated controversy and an exchange of articles with Jules Déjerine over the localization of language functions in the human brain. The debate spread internationally. One of the timeliest responses, that appeared in print 1 month after Marie’s paper, came from Christofredo Jakob, a Bavarian-born neuropathologist working in Buenos Aires. The present study comprises an English translation of Jakob’s 1906 paper and a discussion of Jakob’s ideas on the localizationist–holistic approach regarding the role of Broca’s area. This issue is still at the core of scientific debate in the light of current neuropsychological and neuroimaging findings.     

Telemedicine in Primary Health: The Virtual Doctor Project Zambia

Physician-researchers are bound by professional obligations stemming from both the role of the physician and the role of the researcher. Currently, the dominant models for understanding the relationship between physician-researchers' clinical duties and research duties fit into three categories: the similarity position, the difference position and the middle ground. The law may be said to offer a fourth "model" that is independent from these three categories. These models frame the expectations placed upon physician-researchers by colleagues, regulators, patients and research participants. This paper examines the extent to which the data from semi-structured interviews with 30 physician-researchers at three major pediatric hospitals in Canada reflect these traditional models. It seeks to determine the extent to which existing models align with the described lived experience of the pediatric physician-researchers interviewed. Ultimately, we find that although some physician-researchers make references to something like the weak version of the similarity position, the pediatric-researchers interviewed in this study did not describe their dual roles in a way that tightly mirrors any of the existing theoretical frameworks. We thus conclude that either physician-researchers are in need of better training regarding the nature of the accountability relationships that flow from their dual roles or that models setting out these roles and relationships must be altered to better reflect what we can reasonably expect of physician-researchers in a real-world environment.