Did you know that scholars mapped cranial nerves a thousand years ago, or that ancient physicians described consciousness and neurological disorders to a remarkable degree (Yousef, 2024)?
Modern neuroscience typically teaches a history that begins with the ancient Greeks, skips nearly two thousand years, and resumes with European thinkers of the Renaissance. This narrative ignores non-Western discoveries entirely, and reinforces a Eurocentric story in which progress radiates outward from Europe. In reality, during those “silent” centuries, scholars across the Islamic world, India, and China were actively advancing the understanding of the brain, the nervous system, and the mind.
Take, for instance, the establishment of the first psychiatric ward, founded in 8th-9th century Baghdad, is widely regarded as the world’s first institution for the treatment of mental disorders (Maravia and Al-Ghazal, 2021). What is striking is not merely that such an institution existed, but that its physicians realised mental illnesses are medical conditions with physiological underpinnings, rather than as purely mental possession (at that time they would likely have viewed it as supernatural possession). This is a distinction we still struggle with today, people sometimes dismissing conditions such as ADHD as being “laziness”, completely dismissing the neurological or neurodevelopmental mechanisms as “personal failures”. This is fascinating as mental and neurological conditions are still somehow less real than other, commonly called “physical” conditions, showing a deep-rooted dualism in our thinking.
The Islamic Golden Age produced scholars whose contributions went far beyond psychiatric care. Ibn al-Haytham, known in Europe as Alhazen, wrote the “Book of Optics” in the 11th century, in which he described the anatomy of the eye, demonstrated that vision arises from light entering the eye (rather than being emitted from it), and linked visual processing to the brain (Unal and Elcioglu, 2009). He also pioneered the camera obscura as an analogue for the eye, likely inspired, as he would have viewed it, by an appreciation of the elegance of God’s creation.
Ibn Sina, or Avicenna as he is known in the Western world, a Persian physician and philosopher of the 10th-11th century, argued that the brain is the organ where sensory experience meets reasoning, a claim that put cognition in the nervous system rather than in the heart, as was commonly believed (Hajar, 2013; Naderi et al., 2003). He is also credited with conducting one of the earliest neuropsychological investigations: his “Flying Man” thought experiment asked readers to imagine a person created suspended in air, deprived of all sensory input, and yet still self-aware, an argument for the independence of self-consciousness from perception that predates Descartes Cogito by over six centuries (Gallagher, 2023). The experiment is reminiscent of modern sensory deprivation research, developed independently in the 1950s by neurophysiologist John C. Lilly, who used isolation tanks to probe whether consciousness persists in the absence of external stimulation (Williams, 2019).
Several centuries later, the Persian physician Mansur ibn Ilyas produced the “Anatomy of the Human Body”, around 1390, which contains one of the earliest known colour illustrations of the human nervous system, depicting the brain, spinal cord, and peripheral nerve networks in remarkable detail (Daneshfard et al., 2022).
Indian medicine, as presented in the Charaka Samhita and the Susruta Samhita, dates back thousands of years. The Charaka Saṃhitā, a foundational compendium of Ayurvedic medicine, contains descriptions of neurological conditions including neuromuscular disorders, tetanus, and dementia, alongside detailed discussions of sensory perception and cognition (Mishra, 2013). The Suśruta Saṃhitā, one of the oldest surviving surgical texts, was translated into Arabic in the 8th century and deals extensively with anatomy, pharmacology, and surgical technique. It provides early descriptions of skull structure, cranial nerves, and the ventricles of the brain (Loukas et al., 2010).
Meanwhile, in China, the Huangdi Neijing (Yellow Emperor’s Inner Canon, compiled circa 2nd century BCE) and later acupuncture traditions described channels that correspond closely to neurovascular bundles, following pathways along major nerves (Shaw and McLennan, 2016). Recent anatomical literature suggests that the originators of the acupuncture system possessed systematic knowledge of the body’s structure, likely derived from careful observation, if not outright dissection, rather than purely abstract theorising (Dorsher and da Silva, 2022).
The mind-body connection, so central to traditional Chinese medicine, is not merely a historical curiosity. The concept of shen (spirit) and its integration with the heart and brain prefigures contemporary ideas that treat consciousness as a distributed phenomenon, rather than a mere brain function (Minelli, 2026). Eastern contemplative practices have also given us tools that Western medicine has only recently begun to value: meditation and mindfulness. The introduction of acceptance-based strategies into modern dialectical behaviour therapy (DBT) draws similarities with these traditions. Furthermore, meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials have confirmed the effectiveness of mindfulness-based interventions for a range of psychological and physical conditions (Goyal et al., 2014).
I am not arguing that these have a foundation that developed out of a monolithic tradition. The Islamic, Indian, and Chinese medical systems each arose from distinct epistemological foundations, with their own internal debates, methodological frameworks, and limitations. What they share is a common exclusion from the dominant narrative of neuroscience history in the European world where I reside.
So what do we miss when we start with Descartes?
When the history of neuroscience is framed as a primarily European endeavour, we lose more than a list of names. We lose entire frameworks for thinking about the relationship between mind and body. We lose the understanding that consciousness may be distributed rather than localised. We lose the idea that self-awareness may be independent of sensory input. And we lose the possibility that non-Western epistemologies, holistic approaches that might offer concepts for the very problems neuroscience is grappling with today (Ogenyi et al., 2025). This is not an abstract hope: the distributed model of consciousness articulated in traditional Chinese medicine is already informing modern predictive coding frameworks, bridging ancient and contemporary neuroscience (Minelli, 2026).
Starting with Descartes does not merely narrow the history; it narrows the imagination. A truly global history of neuroscience would not replace one centre with another, but would recognise that the brain has been studied, debated, and theorised by cultures across the world, each contributing frameworks that remain relevant to the questions we still cannot answer. Most importantly, we lose a rich heritage of human history that we all share.
My impression of modern Neuroscience is that it’s not centred around any culture or geographic position. A significant discovery is treated by its empirical, conceptual and methodological framework, and not by its investigators geographic or cultural heritage, perhaps history should be treated the same.
Declaration of AI use: This article was written with the assistance of Lumo AI for grammar, spell checking, and proofreading.
Disclaimer:This article argues that non-Western contributions to neuroscience have been under-represented in historical narratives, not that European achievements should be diminished. Major European discoveries remain foundational to modern neuroscience. Additionally, this piece discusses historical scientific frameworks and anatomical observations from diverse traditions; it does not endorse alternative medicine practices or validate their efficacy by modern standards. The goal is to document the intellectual history of brain science across cultures, not to advocate for any particular medical system.
References
Daneshfard, B., Sadr, M., Abdolahinia, A. et al., 2022. Mansur ibn Ilyas Shirazi (1380–1422 AD), a pioneer of neuroanatomy. Neurological Sciences 43(4), 2883–2886. DOI: 10.1007/s10072-021-05691-4
Dorsher, P.T. and da Silva, M.A.H., 2022. Acupuncture’s neuroanatomic and neurophysiologic basis. Longhua Chinese Medicine 5, 8. DOI: 10.21037/lcm-21-48
Gallagher, S., 2023. Minimal self-consciousness and the flying man argument. Frontiers in Psychology 14, 1296656. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1296656
Goyal, M., Singh, S., Sibinga, E.M.S. et al., 2014. Meditation programs for psychological stress and well-being: A systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA Internal Medicine 174(3), 357–368. DOI: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2013.13018
Hajar, R., 2013. The Air of History (Part V): Ibn Sina (Avicenna): The Great Physician and Philosopher. Heart Views 14(4), 196–201. DOI: 10.4103/1995-705X.126893
Loukas, M., Lanteri, A., Ferrauiola, J. et al., 2010. Anatomy in ancient India: A focus on the Susruta Samhita. Journal of Anatomy 217(6), 646–650. DOI: 10.1111/j.1469-7580.2010.01294.x
Maravia, U. and Al-Ghazal, S.K., 2021. Bimaristans: Services and Their Educational Role in Islamic Medical History and Their Influence on Modern Medicine and Hospitals. Journal of the British Islamic Medical Association 8(3), 28–42. DOI: 10.11648/jbima.2021.8.3.02
Minelli, A., 2026. The mind-body-world unity: The predictive mind and the allostatic paradigm as a bridge between neuroscience and traditional Chinese medicine. A conceptual review. Brain, Behavior, & Immunity – Integrative 14, 100158. DOI: 10.1016/j.bbi.2026.100158
Mishra, S., 2013. Historical perspective of Indian neurology. Annals of Indian Academy of Neurology 16(4), 467–477. DOI: 10.4103/0972-2327.120422
Naderi, S., Acar, F., Mertol, T., Arda, M.N., 2003. Functional anatomy of the spine by Avicenna in his eleventh century treatise Al-Qanun fi Al-Tibb (The Canons of Medicine). Neurosurgery 52(6), 1449–1454. DOI: 10.1227/01.neu.0000064811.30933.7f
Ogenyi, A., Atkins, B., Bevilaqua, M.C.d.N. et al., 2025. Decolonising the neuroscience and psychology curriculum: experiences and perspectives of Black students. Cogent Education 12(1), 2501465. DOI: 10.1080/2331186X.2025.2501465
Shaw, V. and McLennan, A.K., 2016. Was acupuncture developed by Han Dynasty Chinese anatomists? The Anatomical Record 299(5), 643–659. DOI: 10.1002/ar.23325
Unal, N. and Elcioglu, O., 2009. Anatomy of the eye from the view of Ibn Al-Haitham (965–1039). The founder of modern optics. Saudi Medical Journal 30(3), 323–328. DOI: 10.15537/1658-3175.4648
Williams, C., 2019. On ‘modified human agents’: John Lilly and the paranoid style in American neuroscience. History of the Human Sciences 32(5), 84–107. DOI: 10.1177/0952695119872094
Yousef, T., 2024. Historical Depictions of the Brain: The Origins from the Non-Western World. Journal of Undergraduate Neuroscience Education 23(1), E1–E4. DOI: 10.59390/ZTVE5756
Leave a Reply