Study Questions on Sacks

Q1 What does Sacks (Luria) mean by “romantic science”—he also calls it “personalistic,” or “experiential” ? (See especially p. 5, pp. 174-5). He contrasts his position to that of Kurt Goldstein and Huglings Jackson (p 174) How does Sacks view relate to your idea of what science is or ought to be? (Note: The term “Romantic” is used in a “literary sense.” )

Q2 In terms of methodology, which school of French physiology discussed in this mornings lecture does Sacks most closely resemble in his studies of the human mind? What is the difference between a clinician and an experimentalist? Does Sacks ever conduct “experiments” to understand consciousness? If so, what function do these experiments serve?

Q3 There are a number of case studies included in the readings concerning memory {Lost Mariner (Ch. 2), A Matter of Identity (Ch 12), Reminiscence (Ch. 15, esp pp.145-147), Murder (Ch. 19), The Walking Grove (Ch. 22)}. What characteristics of memory do these cases suggest? What questions about memory are raised for you about these cases? Discuss as well the case of Clive Waring, the musician presented in the morning video. How, if at all, does he fit with cases that Sacks discusses in the readings.

Q4 Sacks discusses the nature of self (and loss of self) in several places. In particular, he discusses David Hume's account of self (p. 39, 124). What is Sack's alternative account of the normal self or mind.

Q5 Sacks entitles the first two parts of the book "Losses" and "Excesses." These losses and excesses are apparently in relation to the "typical" or "normal" condition. What do you think Sacks might mean by "normal" in this context? Discuss the implications of characterizing "diseased" conditions as deviations from the norm(al)? Can you think of other conditions that are deviations from the norm, but which are not labeled by society as diseases?

Each member of the small groups should briefly indicate what they mentioned in their commentary, the group as a whole should formulate a question for full seminar discussion growing out of these commentaries or other issues the have arisen in the discussion of Sacks.