History of Neurogenesis: Implicit Definitions and Pragmatic Falsification

Abstract

This study is seeking a philosophical analysis of the history of neurogenesis. History of neurogenesis is considered to be a history of dogmatic belief that new neurons cannot grow up in an adult mammalian brain. This belief survived in the field of neuroscience for several decades and its roots date back to the time of Ramón y Cajal. An important part of this philosophical analysis focuses on the aspect of the “shielding” of dogma by ad hoc hypotheses. The analysis further investigates implicit definitions, which play the role of axioms of Neuroscience, and problematic aspects of falsification. At the end of this philosophical analysis I present arguments supporting the opinion that history of neurogenesis is not in fact a history of dogmatic thinking, as most authors assume, but rather it is a history of scientific pragmatism.