Article 1
Natural Pneuma in the Medical Theory of Ibn Sina(pp.129-137)

It is often stated that physicians in medieval Islam followed Galen in assuming that there were three kinds of pneumata (psychic, vital and natural) in human beings. This article examines the concept of the third kind of pneuma, the natural pneuma (ruh tabi i), in the medical theory of Ibn Sina (d. 1037). The examination of his medical works reveals that while Ibn SinS had some clear ideas about the workings of the vital and psychic pneumata, he proposed no definite theory of the natural pneuma. He refers only very rarely to the natural pneuma in his Canon of Medicine, Poem of Medicine and On Cardiac Medicaments, and in those few instances the natural pneuma is explained simply as being parallel to the other two pneumata in that it has its seat in a specific organ, is distributed through a specific passage, and gives rise to a specific faculty, namely that it is located in the liver, travels through veins, and gives rise to the natural faculty, just as the vital pneuma, with its source in the heart, travels through the arteries to give rise to the vital faculty, and the psychic pneuma, with its source in the brain, travels through the nerves to give rise to the psychic faculty. In sum, in the medical thought of Ibn Sina, the natural pneuma exists merely as a parallel to the other two pneumata, so as to ensure the existence of a triadic system in the human body.

Article 2
Joji Sakurai's Thoughts and Activities on the Promotion of Science in the Modern Era in Japan(pp.138-147)

This paper gives an overview of the thoughts and activities of a leading Japanese chemist of the early modern era in Japan, Dr. Joji Sakurai, on the promotion of science as the nation modernized. Past studies have regarded Sakurai as important mainly for his work as a chemist; however, his works that have now come to be seen as most important are those on the promotion of science, in his later life. Focusing on the context and development process of Sakurai's thoughts and activities, as well as their content, the author casts new light on Sakurai's work with reference to previously unexamined primary materials (Sakurai's own writings). It is found that Sakurai's philosophy originated in his experience studying abroad in England; was shaped by his teaching and administrative work at the Imperial University of Tokyo; and was developed in the establishment of the Institute of Physical and Chemical Research (RIKEN), the National Research Council, and was then used in the Foundation for the Promotion of Scientific Research in the early twentieth century. Sakurai devoted himself to creating a better environment for scientists by institutional support based on his international experiences and academic network. His unique ideas and practical actions to see them realized, fostering creative, international-minded scientists with adequate government financial support, are undoubtedly the main reasons that led to evaluate Sakurai as the leading promoter of Japanese science and research rather than as a pure chemist.

Article 3
The Formation of the Society of Engineering in Japan : From an Alumni Association to an Academic Society(pp.148-159)
WADA Masanori

The first 23 graduates of the Imperial College of Engineering in Tokyo, or Kobu-Daigakko, founded the Society of Engineering, or Kogakkai, in 1879 as an alumni association. After 1882, the society began allowing other engineers to become regular members. This paper discusses the process how this private organization turned into a public society by uncovering the detail of its early history: establishment; formation of the rule, meetings, the bulletin and journal; registration of other engineers; and the role of Yozo Yamao. Initially, the leading members had been doing only administrative works at the monthly meetings, such as collecting membership fees and revising the rules. The members gradually began holding seminars on industrial and engineering topics. In 1880, they began circulating a bulletin, Kogaku Soshi(later Kogakkai-shi), for the members, and printed eight issues. In response to the requests of non-members, they published the bulletin publicly the following year. In 1882, the society asked a prominent leading figure of engineering Yozo Yamao, one of the co-founders of the Imperial College of Engineering, to be president. Yamao did not engage in any activities while he was president, but he played a role, as a representative, in giving the society wider legitimacy in the engineering world. The early history of the society indicates that the graduates of the College took an active part in the academic field of engineering. Within two years of the 23 members graduating, they made the society a leader in the underdeveloped community of late 19th-century Japan.

Article 4
Eighteenth-Century Attempts to Dissolve the Vis Viva Controversy(pp.160-169)
ARIGA Nobumichi

In his classical article "Eighteenth-century attempts to resolve the vis viva controversy" (1965), T. L. Hankins gave a reassessment of the vis viva controversy, dispute about the Cartesian (mv) and Leibnizian (mv^2) measures of "force." Contrary to traditional views, Hankins's and others' works have established that it was not d'Alembert's Traite de dynamique (1743) which put an end to the controversy. But then, when and how did it end? The present article argues that in the middle of the eighteenth-century, some philosophers or mathematicians tried to dissolve the controversy by rejecting its very premise: the concept of "force of bodies in motion." After briefly discussing the popularity of this concept in the vis viva controversy, I will examine claims and thoughts of three personae. D'Alembert's ambition to build the system of mechanics with highest certainty led him to abandon the idea of force in bodies, because it was too "obscure" and too "metaphysical" to serve as the basis. In a similar manner Maupertuis complained about the obscurity of that idea, and with his original principle he aimed at substituting "conservation" of force for "least" action. With regard to Euler, he insisted that force could not be attributed to individual bodies but to their relations, and that force was derived from the nature of bodies such as inertia or impenetrability. Thus it was by rejecting "force of bodies in motion" that the vis viva controversy began to end; not by, as is often said, realizing that both measures were valid.