BEGIN:VCALENDAR
VERSION:2.0
PRODID:-//The Center for Science & Society at Columbia University - ECPv5.6.0//NONSGML v1.0//EN
CALSCALE:GREGORIAN
METHOD:PUBLISH
X-WR-CALNAME:The Center for Science & Society at Columbia University
X-ORIGINAL-URL:https://blogs.cuit.columbia.edu/scisoc
X-WR-CALDESC:Events for The Center for Science & Society at Columbia University
BEGIN:VTIMEZONE
TZID:America/Halifax
BEGIN:DAYLIGHT
TZOFFSETFROM:-0400
TZOFFSETTO:-0300
TZNAME:ADT
DTSTART:20180311T060000
END:DAYLIGHT
BEGIN:STANDARD
TZOFFSETFROM:-0300
TZOFFSETTO:-0400
TZNAME:AST
DTSTART:20181104T050000
END:STANDARD
END:VTIMEZONE
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=America/Halifax:20180402T180000
DTEND;TZID=America/Halifax:20180402T193000
DTSTAMP:20260604T190745
CREATED:20180119T164828Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20180205T194035Z
UID:8883-1522692000-1522697400@blogs.cuit.columbia.edu
SUMMARY:Alisha Rankin - Testing the Panacea: Antidotes\, Alchemy\, and the Problem of Proof in Early Modern Europe
DESCRIPTION:Heyman Center for the Humanities\, Second Floor Common Room \nSpeaker: Alisha Rankin\, Chair\, Associate Professor of History\, Co-Director of Graduate Studies\, Tufts University \nDiscussant: Kavita Sivaramakrishnan\, Assistant Professor of Sociomedical Sciences\, Mailman School of Public Health\, Columbia University \n\n\nThis talk contrasts the drug testing methods of two sixteenth-century alchemical empirics. Andreas Berthold validated his Paracelsian poison antidote (also deemed a cure-all) by letting learned physicians conduct poison trials at German courts\, in which test subjects (several dogs and a convict) took poison\, followed by the antidote. Georg Amwald\, in contrast\, scoffed at this method and instead included patient testimonial letters as evidence of the efficacy of his panacea poison antidote – a method also used by earlier alchemists such as Leonardo Fioravanti but derided by physicians. These cases elucidate the tricky problem of proof and evidence in early modern drug testing. While poison trials were used at princely courts all over Europe and appeared to give a definitive answer\, they could also be dismissed as singular tricks. Testimonial letters\, meanwhile\, had perceived problems of trustworthiness. Rankin argues that the boundaries of proof were contested and depended largely on the professional designation of the tester. \n\n\nThis event is part of the series\, Explorations in the Medical Humanities. Please visit the Heyman Center website for updates. \nAbout the Series: \nAs a set of disciplines\, the humanities face the challenge of how to write about embodied experiences that resist easy verbal categorization such as illness\, pain\, and healing. The recent emergence of interdisciplinary frameworks such as narrative medicine has offered a set of methodological approaches to address these challenges. Yet conceptualizing a field of medical humanities also offers a broader umbrella under which to study the influence of medico-scientific ideas and practices on society.  Whether by incorporating material culture such as medical artefacts\, performing symptomatic readings of poems and novels\, or excavating the implicit medical assumptions underlying auditory cultures\, the approaches that emerge from a historiographical or interpretive framework are different from those coming from the physician’s black bag. \nSponsored by the Society of Fellows in the Humanities\, the Center for Science and Society\, and the Heyman Center for the Humanities.
URL:https://blogs.cuit.columbia.edu/scisoc/cssevent/alisha-rankin-testing-panacea-antidotes-alchemy-problem-proof-early-modern-europe/
LOCATION:Heyman Center Common Room\, Columbia University\, 74 Morningside Drive\, New York\, NY\, 10027\, United States
CATEGORIES:Center for Science and Society Events,Columbia University Events,NYC Metro area events
END:VEVENT
END:VCALENDAR