Bernstein on agility and its. ON

The author of this book, Nikolai Aleksandrovich Bernstein (1896 - 1966), is an outstanding scientist, corresponding member of the USSR Academy of Medical Sciences, laureate of the USSR State Prize, the creator of a new direction in science - the physiology of activity, the discoverer of a number of its laws.

The book was created in the late 1940s. But it did not see the light of day: its author was accused of cosmopolitanism, vulgarism, and the creation of pseudoscientific theories, and the book was not allowed for production. And now this work falls into the hands of readers for the first time. Although more than four decades have passed since it was written, it is modern and in many ways still original.

Preface

The author of this book, Nikolai Aleksandrovich Bernstein (1896 - 1966), is an outstanding Soviet and world scientist, the creator of a new direction in science, which he modestly called “activity physiology” (modestly because this direction covers not only physiology, but also the psychology and biology of activity ), the discoverer of a number of its laws. Reputable scientists classify his scientific works in the same class as the works of Sechenov, Ukhtomsky, Pavlov.

Bernstein’s main monographs “On the Construction of Movements” and “Essays on the Physiology of Movements and Physiology of Activity” are republished in the “Classics of Science” series (Nauka Publishing House) and continue to be published abroad in translation into English and German.

The basis of all scientific creativity of N. A. Bernstein lies in his new understanding of the vital functions of the body. He views the organism not as a passive reactive system responding to external stimuli and adapting to environmental conditions (as thinkers of the period of “classical” mechanism in physiology believed), but as an active, purposeful system created in the process of evolution. The actions of this organism are aimed each time at satisfying its needs, at achieving a specific goal, which N.A. Bernstein figuratively called “a model of a needed future.” In other words, the process of life is not “balancing with the environment,” but overcoming this environment. It is not aimed at maintaining status, but at moving towards the generic program of development and self-sufficiency. Thus, a living organism is an entropy-resistant, negentropic system.

This understanding of life processes is a manifestation of the principle of materialistic teleology, the principle of expediency (conformity to purpose!) of the nature of the actions of a living organism. With such an understanding of the vital activity of the organism, a new method of studying its movements was required. If in classical mechanistic physiology movements were studied in laboratory conditions, then N.A. Bernstein considered it necessary to study them in natural (practical) conditions. He created a technique that made it possible to obtain on photosensitive film a complete and clear picture (in the form of a series of curves) of how and at what speed those points of a moving person’s body move, the movement of which in three-dimensional space is most important during a particular motor act. Methods were also developed for analyzing the resulting curves and calculating from them the forces acting on a moving part of the body. N.A. Bernstein called his technique kymocyclography and cyclogrammetry.

The enormous, far-reaching significance of the method of studying movements developed by Bernstein was immediately understood and highly appreciated by A. A. Ukhtomsky. In the article “On the fifteenth anniversary of Soviet physiology,” he wrote: “The time is coming when science can talk about “microscopy of time,” as N.A. Bernshtein puts it somewhere... And here there will be a new turn in natural science, the consequences of which we can only estimate for now. we cannot, just as the contemporaries of Leeuwenhoek and Malpig could not foresee what the microscope would bring to their descendants” (Physiological Journal of the USSR named after I.M. Sechenov, vol. XVI, century 1, 1933, p. 47).

To perform this or that movement, the brain not only sends a certain “command” to the muscles, but also receives signals from the peripheral sensory organs about the results achieved and, based on them, gives new, corrective “commands”. Thus, a process of constructing movements occurs in which there is not only direct but also feedback between the brain and the peripheral nervous system.

Further research led N.A. Bernstein to the hypothesis that in order to construct movements of varying complexity, “commands” are issued at hierarchically different levels of the nervous system. When automating movements, this function is transferred to a lower level.

Numerous observations and experiments have fully confirmed this hypothesis.

Already from the above it is clear how important the results of N.A. Bernstein’s research are - not only theoretically, but also for practitioners: for a sports coach and athlete, for a music teacher and performing musician, for a choreographer and ballet dancer, for a director and actor, for all those professions for which precise movement is important, especially if it is performed in unusual conditions (for example, for a pilot - in conditions of unusually large and changing accelerations, for an astronaut - in conditions of weightlessness).

The results of Bernstein's research are also important for a doctor involved in the formation of motor functions in a patient in whom they are impaired by damage to the nervous system or the musculoskeletal system (in particular, during prosthetics).

The results of Bernstein’s work are also important for the engineer who designs moving mechanisms and controls their movement and can at the same time use knowledge about some forms of control of complex movements that nature “invented” and which were studied by Bernstein.

In the very early days of studying movements, Bernstein discovered that when repeating the same movement, for example, hitting a chisel with a hammer, the operating point of the hammer hits the chisel very accurately each time, but the path of the hand with the hammer to the point of impact each time it hits something different. And repeating the movement does not make this path the same. N.A. Bernstein called this phenomenon “repetition without repetition.” This means that with each new blow, the nervous system does not have to accurately repeat the same “orders” to the muscles. Each new movement is performed under slightly different conditions. Therefore, to achieve the same result, other “commands” to the muscles are needed. Movement training does not consist in standardizing “commands”, not in teaching “commands”, but in learning to quickly find a “command” each time, which, under the conditions of this particular movement, will lead to the desired motor result. There is no one-to-one correspondence between the result of movement and the “commands” sent by the brain to the muscles. There is a clear correspondence between the result of movement and the “image of the required future” encoded in the nervous system.

Current page: 1 (book has 27 pages in total)

Nikolai Alexandrovich Bernshtein

About dexterity and its development

NIKOLAY ALEXANDROVICH BERNSTEIN

The author of this book, Nikolai Aleksandrovich Bernstein (1896 - 1966), is an outstanding Soviet and world scientist, the creator of a new direction in science, which he modestly called “activity physiology” (modestly, because this direction covers not only physiology, but also the psychology and biology of activity ), the discoverer of a number of its laws. Reputable scientists classify his scientific works in the same class as the works of Sechenov, Ukhtomsky, Pavlov.

Bernstein’s main monographs “On the Construction of Movements” and “Essays on the Physiology of Movements and Physiology of Activity” are republished in the “Classics of Science” series (Nauka Publishing House) and continue to be published abroad in translation into English and German.

The basis of all scientific creativity of N. A. Bernstein lies in his new understanding of the vital functions of the body. He views the organism not as a passive reactive system responding to external stimuli and adapting to environmental conditions (as thinkers of the period of “classical” mechanism in physiology believed), but as an active, purposeful system created in the process of evolution. The actions of this organism are aimed each time at satisfying its needs, at achieving a specific goal, which N.A. Bernstein figuratively called “a model of a needed future.” In other words, the process of life is not “balancing with the environment,” but overcoming this environment. It is not aimed at maintaining status, but at moving towards the generic program of development and self-sufficiency. Thus, a living organism is a negentropic system that resists entropy.

This understanding of life processes is a manifestation of the principle of materialistic teleology, the principle of expediency (conformity to purpose!) of the nature of the actions of a living organism. With such an understanding of the vital activity of the organism, a new method of studying its movements was required. If in classical mechanistic physiology movements were studied in laboratory conditions, then N.A. Bernstein considered it necessary to study them in natural (practical) conditions. He created a technique that made it possible to obtain on photosensitive film a complete and clear picture (in the form of a series of curves) of how and at what speed those points of a moving person’s body move, the movement of which in three-dimensional space is most important during a particular motor act. Methods were also developed for analyzing the resulting curves and calculating from them the forces acting on a moving part of the body. N.A. Bernstein called his technique kymocyclography and cyclogrammetry.

The enormous, far-reaching significance of the method of studying movements developed by Bernstein was immediately understood and highly appreciated by A. A. Ukhtomsky. In the article “On the fifteenth anniversary of Soviet physiology,” he wrote: “The time is coming when science can talk about “microscopy of time,” as N.A. Bernstein puts it somewhere... And here there will be a new turn in natural science, the consequences of which we can still estimate we cannot, just as the contemporaries of Leeuwenhoek and Malpig could not foresee what the microscope would bring to their descendants” (Physiological Journal of the USSR named after I.M. Sechenov, vol. XVI, century 1, 1933, p. 47).

To perform this or that movement, the brain not only sends a certain “command” to the muscles, but also receives signals from the peripheral sensory organs about the results achieved and, based on them, gives new, corrective “commands”. Thus, a process of constructing movements occurs in which there is not only direct but also feedback between the brain and the peripheral nervous system.

Further research led N.A. Bernstein to the hypothesis that in order to construct movements of varying complexity, “commands” are issued at hierarchically different levels of the nervous system. When automating movements, this function is transferred to a lower level.

Numerous observations and experiments have fully confirmed this hypothesis.

Already from the above it is clear how important the results of N.A. Bernstein’s research are - not only theoretically, but also for practitioners: for a sports coach and athlete, for a music teacher and performing musician, for a choreographer and ballet dancer, for a director and actor, for all those professions for which precise movement in terms of results is important, especially if it is performed in unusual conditions (for example, for a pilot - in conditions of unusually large and changing accelerations, for an astronaut - in conditions of weightlessness).

The results of Bernstein's research are also important for a doctor involved in the formation of motor functions in a patient in whom they are impaired by damage to the nervous system or the musculoskeletal system (in particular, during prosthetics).

The results of Bernstein’s work are also important for the engineer who designs moving mechanisms and controls their movement and can at the same time use knowledge about some forms of control of complex movements that nature “invented” and which were studied by Bernstein.

In the very early days of studying movements, Bernstein discovered that when repeating the same movement, for example, hitting a chisel with a hammer, the operating point of the hammer hits the chisel very accurately each time, but the path of the hand with the hammer to the point of impact each time it hits something different. And repeating the movement does not make this path the same. N.A. Bernstein called this phenomenon “repetition without repetition.” This means that with each new blow, the nervous system does not have to accurately repeat the same “orders” to the muscles. Each new movement is performed under slightly different conditions. Therefore, to achieve the same result, other “commands” to the muscles are needed. Movement training does not consist in standardizing “commands”, not in teaching “commands”, but in learning to quickly find a “command” each time, which, under the conditions of this particular movement, will lead to the desired motor result. There is no one-to-one correspondence between the result of movement and the “commands” sent by the brain to the muscles. There is a clear correspondence between the result of movement and the “image of the required future” encoded in the nervous system.

At the same time, the main scientific works of N.A. Bernstein, including his two fundamental monographs, both in terms of the volume of information provided (they had to provide detailed data on numerous observations and experiments, compare his methodology and his research results with the methodology and results of others authors), and by the nature of the presentation were addressed primarily to scientists: physiologists, psychologists, biologists, doctors, etc. - or to readers who have thorough training in the relevant branches of science. It was difficult for the general reader to use these works.

And Bernstein wanted to bring his ideas, the results of his research, to a wide range of readers, in particular to those for whom they were of not only purely educational, but also professional interest. That is why he willingly accepted the offer of the Central Research Institute of Physical Culture to write a popular science book, to which he gave the title “On Agility and Its Development.” He is enthusiastic

worked on it (this can be seen from a number of his notes), the manuscript was not only approved by the institute and accepted for publication, but even put into production... But it was precisely at this time that the rampant Lysenkoism, the fight against Weismannism-Morganism, against cosmopolitanism and similar phenomena occurred . And as a result, the publication did not materialize. Only now, almost half a century after the work was on the author’s desk, will it land on the reader’s desk. But despite this, the book retains its significance today.

The largest circle of readers for whom this book is of professional interest are sports workers and athletes. Therefore, the book is published by the publishing house “Physical Culture and Sports”. But, as mentioned above, it is intended for many other reader groups.

Professor I. M. Feigenberg

PREFACE

This book was written at the suggestion of the directorate of the Central Research Institute of Physical Culture. The proposal had a twofold goal: to give the clearest possible definition and analysis of the complex psychophysical quality of agility and to publicly present modern views on the nature of coordination of movements, motor skills, training, etc., which are of paramount practical importance both for physical education workers and for everyone participants in the physical education movement, which should be a cultural movement in our country in every sense of the word. Thus, this book was supposed to be popular science.

The need for popular science literature in our Union is very great. It would be fundamentally wrong to deny its significance on the grounds that the Soviet Union does not need half-knowledge and that it is impossible to challenge for its citizens either the right or ability to master specialized literature, without any condescension or arrogance, as if inevitably associated with popularization Sciences. This view is completely wrong.

Those times when every scientist could be oriented to varying degrees in all branches of natural science are long gone and irrevocable. Already two hundred years ago such universalism required such an all-encompassing genius, How genius of Lomonosov. And he, in essence, was the last representative in the world of the type of universal naturalist. Over the two centuries that separate us from it, the volume and content of natural science have grown so immensely that scientists now spend their entire lives mastering the material of one of their main narrow specialties, and few of them are able to allocate enough time even for in order to keep up with the times, to follow the rapid flow of current scientific literature in this specialty. He often does not even have time to think about other branches of the same science, and even more so about other branches of natural science.

This flooding flow of new factual material in all branches of natural science and the ever-increasing differentiation of scientific and scientific-applied professions, directly related to its growth, threaten more and more to turn their representatives into narrow specialists, devoid of any horizons, blind to everything, except for the narrow path along which life directed them. And this narrowing of the field of vision is dangerous not only because it deprives people of all the irresistible charm of a broad general education, but most importantly because it teaches them not to see the forest for the trees even in their specialty, it emasculates creative thought, impoverishes work in terms of fresh ideas and great prospects. Already Jonathan Swift, also two hundred years ago, was able to prophetically foresee such narrow “gelerters” with blinders on their eyes, blind, reported eccentrics, and cruelly ridiculed them in the academy of sciences of the island of Lagado he depicted.

It is to overcome this danger that popular science literature is needed. May all the muses protect her from condescending arrogance towards the reader, from Horace’s “Odi profanum vulgus et arceo”! . She sees in the reader not a layman, not a vulgar mob, but a fellow human being who needs to be acquainted with the main foundations and the latest word of related science, which he could not possibly reach if he had to study these issues through mountains of primary sources and specialized literature. She strives to provide him with that broad outlook that is necessary for both scientific-theoretical and practical creativity in any field, she strives not to lower herself to some imaginary and disrespected layman, but to raise a fellow reader of a different specialty to a bird’s eye view, from where you can see the whole world.

A modern leader - both theoreticians and practitioners - must know everything about his basics and the basics about everything.

That part of the general theory of literature, which is the subject of popular scientific literature, has not yet been completely developed. Chaos, ambiguity and palpable empiricism reign in it to the fullest extent. However, in trying to make a contribution to this kind of literature and approaching this task with all the responsible seriousness that it deserves, it is necessary first of all to be aware of how to take up the matter.

Good typical representatives of one of them can be the widely circulated and well-known volumes published by the Enlightenment group: “The Universe” by Meyer, “The History of the Earth” by Neymayr, “Man” by Ranke, etc. Books of this type are no different in presentation from any educational or scientific manuals, except for the constant remembering of the level of preparedness of the reader for whom they are intended. They do not try to attract or interest the reader in any way, except for the interest that the topic itself and the content of the subject being presented may be of interest to him; they present the presentation in a dry, businesslike manner, within the framework of a plan dictated more by the dogmatics of the topic than by its didactics.

The second type, or style, of popular science presentation could be called Flammarionian. Flammarion's well-known popular opuses on astronomy and cosmography are mainly characterized by two features. Firstly, this is a constant flirtation with the reader, and even more so with the reader of the book, whom the author, according to the ideas of bourgeois society of the 19th century, interprets as an extremely muslin, impatient and ignorant person, but towards whom he does not spare any portions of gallantry. Secondly, it saturates the text with a huge amount of water. There is no doubt that simplicity of presentation and its wateriness are far from the same thing; we know any number of examples of highly specialized and difficult to understand scientific works, which, however, contain 90 % liquid, useless solvent. From our point of view, such swelling of the book helps the matter no more than flirting with readers of both sexes.

The third style, or type, dates back to very recent times and is most clearly represented in the books of de Cruy, dedicated to the history of great discoveries in the field of medicine and biology. The first and most talented of his books, Microbe Hunters, is widely known and successful in our country. De Kruy for the first time, as far as we can judge, introduced into popular science literature a bold, broad impressionistic style, enriched with all the modern achievements of general literary stylistics. His speech is rich in images, vivid comparisons, full of humor, in places rising to the passionate fervor of a tribune of science and a lawyer of martyrs. He is helped by the historical aspect in which most of the stories are written: whether it is the story of a great discovery with its complex twists and turns or the life story of an outstanding scientist - in both cases the narrative is saturated with dynamics, plot, and unfolding intrigue. The reader waits with bated breath for what will happen next, and is ready to look at the last page, as the young ladies did when reading an exciting novel. The title of de Kruy's first book, “Microbe Hunters,” already introduces the reader to his style and manner: he turns the history of scientific struggle into a fascinating adventure story, without in any way reducing the height and significance of the events described.

De Kruy’s manner is beginning to find echoes in our Union; there is no doubt, for example, that the talented essays of Tatyana Tess, devoted to the characteristics of the largest modern Soviet scientists and appearing from time to time in central newspapers, are largely inspired by the manner of this author. The essays of the untimely deceased Larisa Reisner had much in common with this same style.

Having settled on this latter style due to a number of its inherent attractive aspects, the author, however, found himself in a much more difficult position, not having the unfolding plot dynamics at his disposal. The challenge was to apply this style of storytelling to the presentation of theory, a branch of a scientific discipline with a certain static nature that is inevitable for it. It was easiest to cope with essay III (“On the origin of movements”), precisely because of its historicity, and to dramatize the broad and fascinating canvas of the evolution of movement in the animal world, right up to man.

In the remaining essays, the author decided to use the entire available arsenal of means developed and sanctified by the theory of the literary word, everything that it sanctions in terms of visual techniques. The author was imbued with the determination not to be afraid of using any Russian literary word that could most accurately and clearly express the required thought, even if this word is not part of the official literary (scientific and service) language. Further, he widely uses all kinds of comparisons and likenings, ranging from fleeting metaphors lost inside subordinate clauses to detailed parallels that last a whole page.

The desire to enliven the presentation as much as possible led to the inclusion of a number of narrative episodes in the text, from fairy-tale-mythological inserts to realistic essays, mainly inspired by the impressions of the Great Patriotic War. Finally, with regard to the illustrative design of the book, the author, having broad support from the publishing house, accompanied the text with a very large number of drawings. Along with figures that are closely related to the text in terms of reference and content, the book contains a number of scientific illustrations that indirectly illuminate the presentation (these are mainly drawings from the fields of anatomy, zoology, paleontology and photographic documents of the highest achievements of sports art). We were not afraid to include some humorous element in the form of caricatures, good-naturedly laughing at baggyness and clumsiness or presenting comically unattainable examples of dexterity and resourcefulness.

Maybe all these searches in the field of popular science form are one big mistake. However, there is undoubtedly a chance that at least some small grain of what was found was found correctly. After all, only those who do not seek anything are not mistaken, and on the other hand, not a single seeker ever expected to find correctly at once.

To evaluate what has been done, let us rely on harsh but comradely criticism and the entire broad experience of the reader.

Prof. N. A. Bernshtein

Essay I What is agility?

Scientific combat and reconnaissance

Physiology has long ceased to be the “science of frogs.” Her subject was constantly growing both in size and level of development. She tried her hand at pigeons and chickens, then moved on to cats and dogs. Even later, monkeys took a strong position in laboratories. The relentless demands of practice brought physiology closer and closer directly to man.

There was a time when man was viewed as a very special being of a semi-divine nature. Any experimental study of the structure and properties of his body was then considered blasphemy. Spontaneous scientific materialism took over the leading positions only three hundred years ago; That's when the first frog was cut up. But by our time, the gulf between all other living creatures and man has again begun to be revealed in all its depth. This time the matter was no longer about the divine nature or the immortal soul of man; This abyss was revealed by the inevitable real demands of life practice. The physiology of labor, the physiology of physical exercise and sports arose. What kind of work can be studied on a cat or chicken? What do athletics and a frog have in common?

This is how true human physiology and purely human activity develops more and more and expands its boundaries. She fights to take position after position, penetrating deeper and deeper into the secrets of the functions of the human body.

The development of every natural science, including physiology, can very accurately be likened to a steady, victorious military offensive. The enemy - the region of the unknown - is strong and is far from being finished off. Every inch of land has to be recaptured from him through stubborn, fierce battles. The offensive does not always develop successfully. There are also stops, sometimes quite long, when both sides dig in against each other and gather new strength. It also happens that an area that seemed to have already been conquered again falls back to an unknown enemy. This happens when a scientific theory, on which great hopes were placed, turns out to be erroneous, and the facts underlying it turn out to be misunderstood and falsely interpreted. And yet the army of science knows only temporary breakthroughs and failures. Just as in an ocean tide each wave overwhelms some half a meter more than the previous one, and yet wave after wave, minute after minute, raises the tide higher and higher, so the scientific offensive unfolds. Only, unlike the tides, there is no end or limit to this advance.

And in detail there are many similarities between the life of science and the combat situation. There is a slow but steady, iron advancement of the whole front, when every step is won firmly and forever. There are bold throws, brilliant breakthroughs that in the shortest possible time penetrate far into the depths in a direction where before for years it was not possible to push back the enemy even an inch. The discoveries of Lobachevsky, Pasteur, Mendeleev, and Einstein stand tall in the history of scientific battles with such magnificent breakthroughs. There are—and just as necessary in science as in real war—short reconnaissance raids deep into enemy locations. These reconnaissance raids do not attempt to capture and hold in their hands any new piece of territory. But such reconnaissance can provide a lot of valuable information about the enemy’s immediate rear and thereby help the main combat forces orient themselves for upcoming offensive operations along the entire front.

The author of this book has been working for a quarter of a century as a modest officer in the active army of science, in the area of ​​physiology of human movements. All these years he had to participate only in the systematic and slow offensive operations of the scientific infantry. Proposal to write essays on physiology of agility was a combat assignment with the nature of reconnaissance, since in this direction there is still very little material that has been firmly conquered by scientific research. It was timely and necessary to undertake such reconnaissance; life insistently demands it. Whether the choice of the executing officer was successful and whether the material collected by this intelligence service turned out to be to some extent valuable is not for the author to judge. The reconnaissance report now lies before the reader's eyes in the form of a printed book. Let him speak about it himself.

“On agility and its development”: Publishing House “Physical Culture and Sports” of the USSR State Committee for Press; Moscow; 1991

ISBN 5‑278‑00339‑1

annotation

The author of this book, Nikolai Aleksandrovich Bernstein (1896 - 1966), is an outstanding scientist, corresponding member of the USSR Academy of Medical Sciences, laureate of the USSR State Prize, the creator of a new direction in science - the physiology of activity, the discoverer of a number of its laws.

The book was created in the late 1940s. But it did not see the light of day: its author was accused of cosmopolitanism, vulgarism, and the creation of pseudoscientific theories, and the book was not allowed for production. And now this work falls into the hands of readers for the first time. Although more than four decades have passed since it was written, it is modern and in many ways still original.

Popular science publication.

Nikolai Aleksandrovich Bernstein about agility and its development

Nikolai Aleksandrovich Bernstein

The author of this book, Nikolai Aleksandrovich Bernstein (1896 - 1966), is an outstanding Soviet and world scientist, the creator of a new direction in science, which he modestly called “activity physiology” (modestly because this direction covers not only physiology, but also the psychology and biology of activity ), the discoverer of a number of its laws. Reputable scientists classify his scientific works in the same class as the works of Sechenov, Ukhtomsky, Pavlov.

Bernstein’s main monographs “On the Construction of Movements” and “Essays on the Physiology of Movements and Physiology of Activity” are republished in the “Classics of Science” series (Nauka Publishing House) and continue to be published abroad in translation into English and German.

The basis of all scientific creativity of N. A. Bernstein lies in his new understanding of the vital functions of the body. He views the organism not as a passive reactive system responding to external stimuli and adapting to environmental conditions (as thinkers of the period of “classical” mechanism in physiology believed), but as an active, purposeful system created in the process of evolution. The actions of this organism are aimed each time at satisfying its needs, at achieving a specific goal, which N.A. Bernstein figuratively called “a model of a needed future.” In other words, the process of life is not “balancing with the environment,” but overcoming this environment. It is not aimed at maintaining status, but at moving towards the generic program of development and self-sufficiency. Thus, a living organism is an entropy-resistant, negentropic system.

This understanding of life processes is a manifestation of the principle of materialistic teleology, the principle of expediency (conformity to purpose!) of the nature of the actions of a living organism. With such an understanding of the vital activity of the organism, a new method of studying its movements was required. If in classical mechanistic physiology movements were studied in laboratory conditions, then N.A. Bernstein considered it necessary to study them in natural (practical) conditions. He created a technique that made it possible to obtain on photosensitive film a complete and clear picture (in the form of a series of curves) of how and at what speed those points of a moving person’s body move, the movement of which in three-dimensional space is most important during a particular motor act. Methods were also developed for analyzing the resulting curves and calculating from them the forces acting on a moving part of the body. N.A. Bernstein called his technique kymocyclography and cyclogrammetry.

The enormous, far-reaching significance of the method of studying movements developed by Bernstein was immediately understood and highly appreciated by A. A. Ukhtomsky. In the article “On the fifteenth anniversary of Soviet physiology,” he wrote: “The time is coming when science can talk about “microscopy of time,” as N.A. Bernshtein puts it somewhere... And here there will be a new turn in natural science, the consequences of which we can only estimate for now. we cannot, just as the contemporaries of Leeuwenhoek and Malpig could not foresee what the microscope would bring to their descendants” (Physiological Journal of the USSR named after I.M. Sechenov, vol. XVI, century 1, 1933, p. 47).

To perform this or that movement, the brain not only sends a certain “command” to the muscles, but also receives signals from the peripheral sensory organs about the results achieved and, based on them, gives new, corrective “commands”. Thus, a process of constructing movements occurs in which there is not only direct but also feedback between the brain and the peripheral nervous system.

Further research led N.A. Bernstein to the hypothesis that in order to construct movements of varying complexity, “commands” are issued at hierarchically different levels of the nervous system. When automating movements, this function is transferred to a lower level.

Numerous observations and experiments have fully confirmed this hypothesis.

Already from the above it is clear how important the results of N.A. Bernstein’s research are - not only theoretically, but also for practitioners: for a sports coach and athlete, for a music teacher and performing musician, for a choreographer and ballet dancer, for a director and actor, for all those professions for which precise movement is important, especially if it is performed in unusual conditions (for example, for a pilot - in conditions of unusually large and changing accelerations, for an astronaut - in conditions of weightlessness).

The results of Bernstein's research are also important for a doctor involved in the formation of motor functions in a patient in whom they are impaired by damage to the nervous system or the musculoskeletal system (in particular, during prosthetics).

The results of Bernstein’s work are also important for the engineer who designs moving mechanisms and controls their movement and can at the same time use knowledge about some forms of control of complex movements that nature “invented” and which were studied by Bernstein.

In the very early days of studying movements, Bernstein discovered that when repeating the same movement, for example, hitting a chisel with a hammer, the operating point of the hammer hits the chisel very accurately each time, but the path of the hand with the hammer to the point of impact each time it hits something different. And repeating the movement does not make this path the same. N.A. Bernstein called this phenomenon “repetition without repetition.” This means that with each new blow, the nervous system does not have to accurately repeat the same “orders” to the muscles. Each new movement is performed under slightly different conditions. Therefore, to achieve the same result, other “commands” to the muscles are needed. Movement training does not consist in standardizing “commands”, not in teaching “commands”, but in learning to quickly find a “command” each time, which, under the conditions of this particular movement, will lead to the desired motor result. There is no one-to-one correspondence between the result of movement and the “commands” sent by the brain to the muscles. There is a clear correspondence between the result of movement and the “image of the required future” encoded in the nervous system.

At the same time, the main scientific works of N.A. Bernstein, including his two fundamental monographs 1 both in terms of the volume of information provided (they had to provide detailed data on numerous observations and experiments, compare his methodology and his research results with the methodology and results other authors), and by the nature of the presentation were addressed primarily to scientists: physiologists, psychologists, biologists, doctors, etc. - or to readers who have thorough training in the relevant branches of science. It was difficult for the general reader to use these works.

And Bernstein wanted to bring his ideas, the results of his research, to a wide range of readers, in particular to those for whom they were of not only purely educational, but also professional interest. That is why he willingly accepted the offer of the Central Research Institute of Physical Culture to write a popular science book, which he gave the title “On Agility and Its Development.” He is enthusiastic

worked on it (this can be seen from a number of his notes), the manuscript was not only approved by the institute and accepted for publication, but even put into production... But it was precisely at this time that the rampant Lysenkoism, the fight against Weismannism-Morganism, against cosmopolitanism and similar phenomena occurred . And as a result, the publication did not materialize. Only now, almost half a century after the work was on the author’s desk, will it land on the reader’s desk. But despite this, the book retains its significance today.

The largest circle of readers for whom this book is of professional interest are sports workers and athletes. Therefore, the book is published by the publishing house “Physical Culture and Sports”. But, as mentioned above, it is intended for many other reader groups.

Professor I. M. Feigenberg

“On agility and its development”: Publishing House “Physical Culture and Sports” of the USSR State Committee for Press; Moscow; 1991

ISBN 5-278-00339-1

annotation

The author of this book, Nikolai Aleksandrovich Bernstein (1896 - 1966), is an outstanding scientist, corresponding member of the USSR Academy of Medical Sciences, laureate of the USSR State Prize, the creator of a new direction in science - the physiology of activity, the discoverer of a number of its laws.

The book was created in the late 1940s. But it did not see the light of day: its author was accused of cosmopolitanism, vulgarism, and the creation of pseudoscientific theories, and the book was not allowed for production. And now this work falls into the hands of readers for the first time. Although more than four decades have passed since it was written, it is modern and in many ways still original.

Popular science publication.

Nikolai Aleksandrovich Bernstein about agility and its development

Nikolai Aleksandrovich Bernstein

The author of this book, Nikolai Aleksandrovich Bernstein (1896 - 1966), is an outstanding Soviet and world scientist, the creator of a new direction in science, which he modestly called “activity physiology” (modestly because this direction covers not only physiology, but also the psychology and biology of activity ), the discoverer of a number of its laws. Reputable scientists classify his scientific works in the same class as the works of Sechenov, Ukhtomsky, Pavlov.

Bernstein’s main monographs “On the Construction of Movements” and “Essays on the Physiology of Movements and Physiology of Activity” are republished in the “Classics of Science” series (Nauka Publishing House) and continue to be published abroad in translation into English and German.

The basis of all scientific creativity of N. A. Bernstein lies in his new understanding of the vital functions of the body. He views the organism not as a passive reactive system responding to external stimuli and adapting to environmental conditions (as thinkers of the period of “classical” mechanism in physiology believed), but as an active, purposeful system created in the process of evolution. The actions of this organism are aimed each time at satisfying its needs, at achieving a specific goal, which N.A. Bernstein figuratively called “a model of a needed future.” In other words, the process of life is not “balancing with the environment,” but overcoming this environment. It is not aimed at maintaining status, but at moving towards the generic program of development and self-sufficiency. Thus, a living organism is an entropy-resistant, negentropic system.

This understanding of life processes is a manifestation of the principle of materialistic teleology, the principle of expediency (conformity to purpose!) of the nature of the actions of a living organism. With such an understanding of the vital activity of the organism, a new method of studying its movements was required. If in classical mechanistic physiology movements were studied in laboratory conditions, then N.A. Bernstein considered it necessary to study them in natural (practical) conditions. He created a technique that made it possible to obtain on photosensitive film a complete and clear picture (in the form of a series of curves) of how and at what speed those points of a moving person’s body move, the movement of which in three-dimensional space is most important during a particular motor act. Methods were also developed for analyzing the resulting curves and calculating from them the forces acting on a moving part of the body. N.A. Bernstein called his technique kymocyclography and cyclogrammetry.

The enormous, far-reaching significance of the method of studying movements developed by Bernstein was immediately understood and highly appreciated by A. A. Ukhtomsky. In the article “On the fifteenth anniversary of Soviet physiology,” he wrote: “The time is coming when science can talk about “microscopy of time,” as N.A. Bernstein puts it somewhere... And here there will be a new turn in natural science, the consequences of which we can still estimate we cannot, just as the contemporaries of Leeuwenhoek and Malpig could not foresee what the microscope would bring to their descendants” (Physiological Journal of the USSR named after I.M. Sechenov, vol. XVI, century 1, 1933, p. 47).

To perform this or that movement, the brain not only sends a certain “command” to the muscles, but also receives signals from the peripheral sensory organs about the results achieved and, based on them, gives new, corrective “commands”. Thus, a process of constructing movements occurs in which there is not only direct but also feedback between the brain and the peripheral nervous system.

Further research led N.A. Bernstein to the hypothesis that in order to construct movements of varying complexity, “commands” are issued at hierarchically different levels of the nervous system. When automating movements, this function is transferred to a lower level.

Numerous observations and experiments have fully confirmed this hypothesis.

Already from the above it is clear how important the results of N.A. Bernstein’s research are - not only theoretically, but also for practitioners: for a sports coach and athlete, for a music teacher and performing musician, for a choreographer and ballet dancer, for a director and actor, for all those professions for which precise movement is important, especially if it is performed in unusual conditions (for example, for a pilot - in conditions of unusually large and changing accelerations, for an astronaut - in conditions of weightlessness).

The results of Bernstein's research are also important for a doctor involved in the formation of motor functions in a patient in whom they are impaired by damage to the nervous system or the musculoskeletal system (in particular, during prosthetics).

The results of Bernstein’s work are also important for the engineer who designs moving mechanisms and controls their movement and can at the same time use knowledge about some forms of control of complex movements that nature “invented” and which were studied by Bernstein.

In the very early days of studying movements, Bernstein discovered that when repeating the same movement, for example, hitting a chisel with a hammer, the operating point of the hammer hits the chisel very accurately each time, but the path of the hand with the hammer to the point of impact each time it hits something different. And repeating the movement does not make this path the same. N.A. Bernstein called this phenomenon “repetition without repetition.” This means that with each new blow, the nervous system does not have to accurately repeat the same “orders” to the muscles. Each new movement is performed under slightly different conditions. Therefore, to achieve the same result, other “commands” to the muscles are needed. Movement training does not consist in standardizing “commands”, not in teaching “commands”, but in learning to quickly find a “command” each time, which, under the conditions of this particular movement, will lead to the desired motor result. There is no one-to-one correspondence between the result of movement and the “commands” sent by the brain to the muscles. There is a clear correspondence between the result of movement and the “image of the required future” encoded in the nervous system.

At the same time, the main scientific works of N.A. Bernstein, including his two fundamental monographs 1 both in terms of the volume of information provided (they had to provide detailed data on numerous observations and experiments, compare his methodology and his research results with the methodology and results other authors), and by the nature of the presentation were addressed primarily to scientists: physiologists, psychologists, biologists, doctors, etc. - or to readers who have thorough training in the relevant branches of science. It was difficult for the general reader to use these works.

And Bernstein wanted to bring his ideas, the results of his research, to a wide range of readers, in particular to those for whom they were of not only purely educational, but also professional interest. That is why he willingly accepted the offer of the Central Research Institute of Physical Culture to write a popular science book, to which he gave the title “On Agility and Its Development.” He is enthusiastic

worked on it (this can be seen from a number of his notes), the manuscript was not only approved by the institute and accepted for publication, but even put into production... But it was precisely at this time that the rampant Lysenkoism, the fight against Weismannism-Morganism, against cosmopolitanism and similar phenomena occurred . And as a result, the publication did not materialize. Only now, almost half a century after the work was on the author’s desk, will it land on the reader’s desk. But despite this, the book retains its significance today.

The largest circle of readers for whom this book is of professional interest are sports workers and athletes. Therefore, the book is published by the publishing house “Physical Culture and Sports”. But, as mentioned above, it is intended for many other reader groups.

Professor I. M. Feigenberg

History knows many examples when artists, not understood and not accepted by their contemporaries, were later ranked among the greats. This is very rare in science. Only sometimes major discoveries did not receive recognition during the lifetime of their authors. This happened, for example, with the works of Gregor Johann Mendel, the founder of the doctrine of heredity and genetics (1822-1884). But there are cases when a scientist who had already achieved recognition was suddenly persecuted: his discoveries were discredited, the books he created were confiscated from libraries, he was kicked out of his job, and he was given political labels. True, this kind of savagery did not happen often: after the era of the Inquisition, this happened, perhaps, only in Stalin’s times in our country and in Hitler’s Germany.

This happened with Nikolai Alexandrovich Bernstein (1896-1966). A prominent scientist, corresponding member of the Academy of Medical Sciences of the USSR, in 1947 he was awarded the highest state prize, then called the Stalin Prize, and in 1949 he was declared a cosmopolitan, a vulgarizer and an author of pseudoscientific theories.

Let's read the reviews of that time. The impression is that there is a war going on. Here is the heavy artillery - Pravda newspaper, August 21, 1950, article by P. Zhukov and A. Kozhin: “...Bernstein is scraping before many bourgeois scientists. Naming the name of the reactionary Sherrington (FOOTNOTE: Sherrington C.S. (1859-1952) - English physiologist, founder of a scientific school, foreign corresponding member of the USSR Academy of Sciences. Author of fundamental discoveries in the field of neurophysiology. Nobel Prize 1932 (FOOTNOTE: from " Soviet Encyclopedic Dictionary”, 1980) and other foreign physiologists... Bernstein brazenly slanderes Pavlov... Bernstein’s “discoveries” are an example of naked biologization and mechanism... Bernstein’s confused anti-Pavlovian teachings cause direct harm to the cause of physical culture.”

Here are medium-caliber guns - magazine “Theory and Practice of Physical Culture”, No. 5, 1949, article “In vicious positions” by Professor A. N. Krestovnikov: “N. A. Bernstein violated the principle of partisanship and historicism... vulgarized and distorted... showed groveling before foreign scientists... belittled the importance of I.P. Pavlov... is grist to the mill of foreign physiologists... His works... are mechanistic and idealistic... characterize the anti-patriotic essence of N.A. Bernstein’s views.”