what is the hypothesis,conclusion and decision of a statement "an organ is a heart,so it pumps blood"
Answers
answer
in the late twelfth century, was the primary "spiritual member" of the body. As such, it was the seat of all emotions. "If indeed from the heart alone rise anger or passion, fear, terror, and sadness; if from it alone spring shame, delight, and joy, why should I say more?" wrote Andreas de Laguna in 1535. Harvey metaphorically described the heart as the "king" or "sun" of the body to underscores its cosmological significance. Popular imagery of the heart, such as this image to your left from the mid-seventeenth century, combined scientific and cultural ideas. This image, not from a medical text, effectively conveys a detailed external anatomy of the heart while demonstrating its cultural significance. What do you think the message is?
By the end of seventeenth century, the anatomical knowledge of the heart was surprisingly accurate and Harvey's ideas were widely accepted. The French philosopher Rene Descartes, who was one of the first
schol
all others, for no other instrument performs such continuous, hard work as the heart." He argued that the expansion and contraction of the heart was a function of its role as an intelligent organ: "The complexity of [the heart's] fibers... was prepared by Nature to perform a variety of functions... enlarging when it desires to attract what is useful, clasping its contents when it is time to enjoy what has been attracted, and contracting when it desires to expel residues."
However, Galen was not afraid to contradict others in matters of detailed anatomy, such as Aristotle's claim that the heart is the origin of the nerves. He further argued that the heart was secondary to the liver in its importance to the operations of the body, since it was not the site of the production of the humors. His ideas generally predominated until the mid-seventeenth century.
As the scientific and philosophical writings of Aristotle became more important in medieval Islam and Europe, physicians began to puzzle over the discrepencies between these two ancients. At the beginning of the eleventh century, for example, Avicenna in his Canon of Medicine integrated Aristotle's ideas within his largely Galenic physiology when he wrote: "[The heart is the] root of all faculties and gives the faculties of nutrition, life, apprehension, and movement to several other members." He believed that heart produced breath, the "vital power or innate heat" within the body; it was an intelligent organ that controlled and directed all others. He identified the pulse as "a movement in the heart and arteries which takes the form of alternate expansion and contraction, whereby the breath becomes subjected to the influence of the air inspired." Despite Avicenna's recommendation to pay more attention to the heart, and the writings of the Syrian jurist-physician Ibn al-Nafis in the thirteenth century on pulmonary transit, most medical practitioners preferred Galen's idea that the veins connected the operations of the liver to the heart, which circulated vital spirits throughout the body via the arteries. Look at this published image of the heart on the left. How does it exemplify the vagueness of its anatomy?
The Renaissance revival of anatomy made it possible for physicians to clarify basic structures in the heart. By this point, they commonly agreed the heart was divided into four parts with two ventricles and two auricles. Wondering at the confusion over the divisions of the heart's chambers, Andres de Laguna wrote in 1535, "The heart has only two ventricles, a right and a left. I do not know what is the meaning of the riddle proposed by the people who add a third ventricle to the heart unless perhaps they intend by it those pores which are found in the septum." The drawing on the right by Leonardo da Vinci, probably from the 1490s, illustrates the typical Renaissance image of the heart as a Galenic organ with two basic chambers dividing by the septum. Look closely at it. What function would the "pores" that Laguna mentioned have served? Can you see them?
Leonardo, for all his ability to draw and observe the heart with a great deal of accuracy, did not deviate significantly from Galen's account of it. "The heart of itself is not the beginning of life but is a vessel made of dense muscle vivified and nourished by an artery and a vein as are the other muscles. The heart is of such density that fire can scarcely damage it." Yet he offered a more elaborate mechanical account of the heart, underscoring the relationship between heat and motion. He began to puzzle over the actual movement of the heart, writing:
"