In this lecture, Dr. Carin Berkowitz, the Executive Director of the New Jersey Council for the Humanities, spoke about why anatomists would ever be asked to analyze statues. Her talk had many aspects, one of which focused on Charles Bell\u2019s school of anatomy. I found it compelling that Berkowitz\u2019s talk had a similar overall theme of bridging the gap between science and the humanities. We\u2019ve seen this theme is almost every single lecture given in the series- something I personally enjoy. With myself being a psychology major with a concentration in neuroscience I have been on the line between science and the humanities for years. I have the opportunity to take both types of classes and I find it unfortunate that people often think they are \u201cscience people\u201d or \u201chumanities people.\u201d It\u2019s interesting that these two platforms are just coming together now to potentially solve real world problems.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
Moreover, one of the main points in Berkowitz\u2019s lecture was the difference in Gray\u2019s Anatomy and Bell\u2019s work. Bell\u2019s work and attitude towards Anatomy made it a field that is almost separate from medicine. Many people (especially professionals in the medical field) viewed anatomy as something that is in addition to the medical field- something that someone would never study on its own. However, Bell\u2019s illustrations and classes emphasized the importance of anatomy and how it is more of a \u201creal\u201d field that is incredibly important in the industry. There was significant difference between the two pieces of work- to the point where I could easily see the difference in methods. I find this interesting because I kind of assumed anatomy was the type of subject where it would all be the same no matter who did it. I mean, an arm\u2019s an arm and a leg\u2019s a leg- but this is definitely not the case with Bell.<\/p>\n
Dr. Berkowitz explained my exact statement when she suggested that today there is a significant shift away from the beauty behind science. This can be seen all over the world- especially in the world of education. Looking back to elementary and middle school classes, the most basic charts and diagrams were used for practicality reasons. Never would we look at a beautiful, colorful diagram because teachers aim to simplify things. This is kind of the beginning of students recognizing the heavy divide between science and the humanities. Art stays in art class and would never be brought into the science classroom. This is where students begin to think that they are \u201cscience people\u201d or \u201chumanities people.\u201d This is one of the reasons that the two fields are bridged together to solve more problems.<\/p>\n
One audience member asked a question regarding ethics and anatomy. The audience member questioned where the bodies, used to study anatomy, were obtained. The answer was honestly just as I expected- families that could not protect the bodies were exploited and these bodies were taken. We know that the ethics involved in this are simply not okay, however, it did become a trend for upper class citizens to donate their bodies for science, which definitely is much better.<\/p>\n
Overall, the presence of the past was heavily seen in Dr. Berkowitz\u2019s lecture in both the study of anatomy and the connection between science and the humanities. We are able to look back on anatomy and how it was treated in the past to ensure that we are using it for the right reasons now.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
In this lecture, Dr. Carin Berkowitz, the Executive Director of the New Jersey Council for the Humanities, spoke about why anatomists would ever be asked to analyze statues. Her talk had many aspects, one of which focused on Charles Bell\u2019s school of anatomy. I found it compelling that Berkowitz\u2019s talk had a similar overall theme … <\/p>\n