Homunculus

The homunculus, often homunculus ( Latin for little man ' ) denotes an artificially created humans. The idea of ​​the homunculus was developed in the late Middle Ages in the context of alchemical theories - often using the term ' Arcanum '; often the homunculus appears as a demonic helpers magical practices. The motive of the homunculus was often addressed in the literature, in particular, to illustrate the ambivalence of modern technology. Perhaps the most famous use of the Homunkulusidee is found in Goethe's Faust II

The concept of the homunculus has also received additional meanings in philosophy and neuroscience. In the philosophy of perception and the philosophy of mind is taken with the term " homunculus " on the idea of ​​respect that it once again give a creature in the head, perceive stimuli and have experiences. Although probably not a philosopher believes that there is a homunculus in the head, but throw philosophers occasionally to certain theories which include the existence of such a being unspoken. Assuming for example, that in the visual perception of an image is projected onto the retina, which is then sent as an image in the brain, then it would have in the head again give a being who looks at these pictures. With such thoughts transitions certain ideas about the perception and the mind are to be reduced to absurdity.

In the neuroanatomy is illustrative spoken by a sensory homunculus and a motor homunculus. These homunculi arise as epistemic auxiliary constructions, if the regions of the brain maps the body parts for which each is responsible.

• 2.1 Philosophy of perception
• 2.2 Daniel Dennett and the Cartesian Theater
• Gilbert Ryle 2.3 and the ghost in the machine

Cultural History

Early concepts

The word " homunculus " is already occupied by Cicero, Plautus and Apuleius. There is a diminutive of homo, that is, as a diminutive form of the Latin word for " man," nothing more than " little man, little man ." A culturally and historically significant concept has been associated with that word only in the late Middle Ages, when the much older speculations about the creation of artificial people (see the Pygmalion and Golem myth ) smashing a new, chemically - medical direction. The physician Arnald of Villanova should have thought in the 13th century already has the alchemical production of artificial human. There are even earlier reports about homunculi. Clement of Rome to 250 AD declared that Simon Magus had created a man, in that he turns air into water, water into blood, and eventually blood in meat.

Is described in detail the alleged production of a homunculus in the De natura rerum (1538 ), which is generally attributed to Paracelsus. There also gets the concept of homunculus for the first time its alchemical significance. Paracelsus was a physician, alchemist and mystic of the early 16th century. In De natura rerum from the fact of putrefaction is derived ( rotting and festering organic matter ) in a warm, moist environment that the development of incubated bird's egg and the development of male semen in the uterus constitute such putrefaction. Thus, an artificial hot - humid environment for the growth of a living being could create. Paracelsus gives specific guidance for the creation of a homunculus: One had human sperm have 40 days in a vessel in the ( warming ) rot horse manure. What then brisk, " like a man, but transparent " is. For 40 weeks then one must nourish this being at constant heat with the Arcanum of men's blood, and eventually going to create a human child, but much smaller than a naturally born child.

Later concepts

In the tradition of alchemy, the idea of generating new life was widespread. Organic material appeared to contain a soul substance from which one can make a new, artificial life. Even Pierre Borel, the personal physician of Louis XIV, alleged in the late 17th century that by the distillation of human blood arises a human form. Similar evidence is available from the British chemist and mystic Robert Fludd, who allegedly bred a human head in the retort. With the beginning of modern times one can observe a certain change of Homunkuluskonzeptes but also reflecting ultimately the advancement of science. Was the homunculus at the beginning still a predominantly alchemical - mystical concept, the idea of ​​breeding and artificial procreation people according to the progress of empirical science transformed. The currently most advanced discourses (mechanics, electromagnetism, genetics) inspired these ancient human dream, to the clone and AI fantasies of the present day. Such " scientific " ideas sound already in the early modern science of Francis Bacon utopia The New Atlantis ( 1626 ). In New Atlantis, Bacon outlines a utopian ideal society that is substantially free of the "House of Solomon ", a kind of science academy, dominated. This house of Solomon dominated by scientific progress wonderful techniques, including a strong modification of living organisms possible.

Here, the motif of the homunculus is not only used to bring an optimism about progress in the spirit of Bacon's expression. The Austrian poet Robert Hamer Ling sat around one the figure of the homunculus to practice a sharp critique of an increasingly materialist worldview. In the 1888 published satirical epic homunculus Hamerlingstraße describes a professor who creates a homunculus. This is his creation, however, not content to small and shriveled was his appearance. In his other life of the homunculus makes a career as a businessman and publisher. He founded a magazine that pays no fee for the reproduction of poems, but a fee requests. With the sale of the magazine of the homunculus is rich, but loses his money in a stock market crash. After a suicide attempt, he builds a school for monkeys, which aims to breed better human beings. Since this project and other endeavors fail, the homunculus eventually developed into a radical misanthrope, who is retiring as a hermit and builds on an airship. Finally, the homunculus moves restlessly with this airship and it devastated many lands. The literary scholar Klaus Völker commented Hamerling Homunkulusfigur as follows: " Hamerlingstraße uses the Homunculus figure in his epic as a metaphor for in his eyes ominously materialistic mind of his time, for greed and inhumanity. The Humunkeltum that wants to establish the artificial creature on earth, is the vision of a defaced money and technology and the world. "However, people also explains that Hamerlingstraße could not meet the demands of a critique of science, since his work eventually lose in nationalist and anti-Semitic stereotypes.

The Homunculus in Goethe's Faust

The motive of the Homunculus has been, among others, Goethe during his work on Faust II 1825-1831, as an idea of a man produced chemically, added. This has been made for the first time in 1828 successfully completed the conversion of inorganic into organic matter, the synthesis of urea by Friedrich Wöhler in 1828. A draft of December 17, 1826 Goethe explicitly describes Wagner as the creator of the homunculus, in the final version is missing this part. The poet and close friend of Goethe by Johann Peter Eckermann therefore stated that Mephistopheles was the real creator of the homunculus. Find a final settlement can no longer be the question.

It is possible to explain the idea of ​​the homunculus by Goethe's natural philosophy. Goethe was of the opinion that there was a special lifeblood that zukomme all living beings and organic and inorganic material in principle separate from each other. One calls such a position vitalism. Under this theory, the creation of living beings is unthinkable of inorganic material. If, however, come into play, such as in the generation of homunculi, organic materials, the production of artificial beings would in principle be possible. Even in Goethe the motif of the Homunculus is associated with the idea of a successful science. So he can speak Wagner:

The homunculus in philosophy

In philosophy, the concept of the homunculus is used in a way that differs significantly from the alchemical and literary use. In the philosophy of perception and in the philosophy of mind positions are referred to as " Homunkulustheorien " when they postulate a place in the body to which a conscious being or a spirit is to be found. Most talk of a homunculus here has a critical function: Certain theories are accused that they would imply the existence of a homunculus. However, since there is no homunculus or with such an assumption only problem will be clarified by the organism moved to the Homunculus, these theories are rejected.

Philosophy of perception

In the philosophy of perception is most clearly how it may lead to the adoption of a homunculus. Many classical theories of perception can be described as a reflection theories. Example, it was already René Descartes aware that in visual perception on the retina an image will be generated. Descartes concluded from these facts that people do not directly the material world, but mental images perceive. The presence philosopher Lambert Wiesing commented: " The perceptive man considered always as the visitor a camera obscura only images that are between him and the allegedly seen world. " Now, however, the adoption of an internal image seems to be only a problem if there is a viewer is who is looking at this picture. Not tried images can eventually lead to no conscious perceptual experience. This is the reason why many classical theories of perception postulate a homunculus. For Descartes, the homunculus was in the form of an intangible spirit, which should be presented at the epiphysis information about the material world.

Besides Descartes epistemology of John Locke is a classic example of a Homunkulustheorie. According to Locke, every idea in consciousness must be perceived again. Wiesing comments: " As in the camera obscura someone has to stand to see the pictures on the wall, as a viewer of ideas must also be in the consciousness rooms are assumed, a homunculus, the representations look at the mind. "

Now, however, there is a classic argument against such Homunkulustheorien: Even if there would be a homunculus, so you would have to wonder how he is able to perceive the inner image. If the homunculus perceives the inner picture by itself again generates an internal image, it seems you need to posit another homunculus who perceives the inner image of the homunculus. You can always continue to pursue this issue, because of course you can also ask how the second homunculus can perceive the internal frame of the first homunculus. Philosophers speak at such continuing problems feasible by an infinite regress. However, if one claims that the homunculus must not generate an internal image, it may be asked, why is not the same as completely dispensed with inner images and image theories.

Many perception theorists draw from this Homunkulusargumentation the conclusion that one should not be explained by internal images or image theories the process of perception. This does not mean that the idea of inner pictures must be fundamentally wrong. So the question of mental images in cognitive science in the imagery debate has much attention been found.

Daniel Dennett and the Cartesian Theater

The philosophical debate about homunculi, however, is not limited solely to the philosophy of perception. The philosopher Daniel Dennett represents about the thesis that many theories of the mind unconsciously assume mostly the existence of a homunculus. This done if and only if it is assumed that all information must be brought together in one place in the brain to come to consciousness. The cognitive neuroscience has about found out that there are regions in the brain that respond selectively to particular shapes, colors or movements. The criticized by Dennett theories now assume that in the exercise of such a flying blue ball the information about the different properties must be combined in order to arrive at the perception of a flying blue ball.

Dennett argues that such a merging of the information is only required for the adoption of a homunculus and tries to make this point through the metaphor of the " Cartesian theater" clearly. As already described, Descartes assumed that the mind a mental picture must be presented in order to arrive at a perception. Dennett then argues that the joint presentation of properties such as color, shape and movement is only necessary if it were accepted by an observer in the brain, which together carry all the distributed information represented. Explains Dennett: ". , If a particular observation was made by a specialized part of the brain, the information is given and need not be sent to a re- observation to a central observer " This Homunkulustheorien presents Dennett 's own " model of different designs " (multiple drafts model ) counter. According to this model in various brain regions different interpretation of inputs are developed, which compete with each other but are never compared in a central location. Finally, an interpretation put by the fact that it leads to a specific output.

Dennett's critique of the Cartesian theater has been taken quite different. While most theorists agree with Dennett that there is no identifiable geographic location where all information will be merged. Nevertheless, it is often argued that people have uniform perceptions and not only information on individual properties. Taking about a true flying, blue ball, so it follows a uniform perceptual situation that could not be explained by Dennett's model of different designs. Rather, one must identify a mechanism by which the combination of the individual properties will made ​​it possible to form a single perception. In neuroscience the search for such a mechanism, under the term of the bond issue has become known. The modern proposals for the solution of the binding problem assume, however not from a place where all the information will be merged. Rather say about neuroscientists as Wolf Singer and Christoph von der Malsburg, that a synchronous firing of different neuronal assemblies make the assembly of properties such as color, shape or motion possible.

Gilbert Ryle and the ghost in the machine

A well even sharper criticism of Homunkulustheorien found in Gilbert Ryle, the teacher of Daniel Dennett. Although Ryle speaks of a ghost in the machine, not a homunculus, yet his vote and Dennett's argument agree on essential points. Also Ryle begins with Descartes and declares that the postulate an immaterial res cogitans ( a thinking thing) has led to countless confusions in philosophy. The central error is according to Ryle that you understand mental states such as perceptions, memories or sensations as inner states, so be localized in the body. After Ryle leads such an idea to the image of a ghost that ( the body) steer a machine.

The alternative to this picture of inner states is according to Ryle a methodological behaviorism: people can just be certain perceptions, thoughts, or feelings are awarded when they show a certain behavior or at least a behavioral disposition. Mental states are for Ryle so nothing affairs, but the disposition to behave in a certain way. Today behaviorism is rejected by most philosophers. It is not generally assumed that the postulate of internal, mental states leads to a Homunkulusproblem. However, just coincides Dennett's position in essential points with Ryle's theory. Even Dennett believes that it (be it a brain process or an intangible state) no internal state admit that is to be identified with a mental state. Rather, he believes that there are numerous processes, some of which are finally translated and led to a particular behavior. The attribution of mental states would find then take as a result of the observable patterns of behavior.

Homunculus in the neuroanatomy

In neuroscience, the term homunculus is used metaphorically since the 1950s. In anatomy of the brain representations of body regions on the primary beef fields in the region of the central sulcus be understood as a sensory homunculus postcentral gyrus or motor homunculus precentral gyrus. For all sensory and motor pathways, there is a point- to-point correspondence between the body periphery and the brain. For example, a certain group of cells in the cerebral cortex (cortex ) for the conscious perception of a painful stimulus in a precisely defined area of ​​skin, and that only for this, in charge. The brain can be concluded, in which the body portion of the pain occurs so solely from the activated cell group in the cortex. These projections from the body to the brain correspond to the sensory and motor cortical fields. The size of the cell area in the cortical area is not exactly the extent of the area in the body. For particularly sensitive or delicate fine motor body sections ( eg, fingers) are quite large cortical areas are available. Other body parts that do not perform finely tuned movements and so sensitive to pain are not (eg, abdomen), have only relatively small cortical fields. The " Homunculus ", created by the symbolic tracing of the associated with the cortex areas parts of the body is so severely distorted from the actual body shape. The principal assignability of the body and brain cortex areas ( somatotopy ) had been postulated in the 19th century by John Hughlings Jackson. The Canadian neurosurgeon Wilder Penfield was able to support this conjecture experimentally and observe the exact assignment. He outlined the size and proportions described the drawing in recourse to the cultural and historical context jokingly as a homunculus. The same kind of symbolic figure is used in alternative medicine for the reflex zones.