Читать книгу Of Medicine, in Eight Books онлайн

22 страница из 100

On the other hand, those, who from experience, stile themselves empiricks, admit indeed the evident causes as necessary; but affirm the inquiry after the occult causes and natural actions to be fruitless, because nature is incomprehensible. And that these things cannot be comprehended, appears from the controversies among those, who have treated concerning them, there being no agreement found here either amongst the philosophers or the physicians themselves: for, why should one believe Hippocrates rather than Herophilus? or, why him more than Asclepiades? that if a man inclines to determine his judgment by reasons assigned, the reasons of each of them seem not improbable; if by cures, all of them have restored the diseased to health; and therefore we should not deny credit either to the arguments or authority of any of them. That even the philosophers must be allowed to be the greatest physicians, if reasoning could make them so; whereas it appears, that they have abundance of words, and very little skill in the art of healing. They say also that the methods of practice differ according to the nature of places; thus one method is necessary at Rome, another in Egypt, and another in Gaul. That if the causes of distempers were the same in all places, the same remedies ought also to be used every where. That often too the causes are evident; as for instance in a lippitude(7), or a wound, and nevertheless the method of cure does not appear from them: that if the evident cause does not suggest this knowledge, much less can the other, which is itself obscure. Seeing then this last is uncertain and incomprehensible, it is much better to seek relief from things certain and tried; that is, from such remedies as experience in the method of curing has taught us, as is done in all other arts; for that neither a husbandman nor a pilot is qualified for his business by reasoning, but by practice: and that these disquisitions have no connection with medicine, may be inferred from this plain fact, that physicians, whose opinions in those matters have been directly opposite to one another, have notwithstanding equally restored their patients to health: that their success was to be ascribed to their having derived their methods of cure, not from the occult causes, or the natural actions, about which they were divided, but from experiments, according as they had succeeded in the course of their practice. That medicine, even in its infancy, was not deduced from these inquiries, but from experiments: for of the sick, who had no physicians, some from a keen appetite, had immediately taken food in the first days of their illness, while others feeling a nausea, had abstained from it; and that the disorder of those, who had abstained, was more alleviated; also, some in the paroxysm of a fever had taken food, others a little before it came on, and others after its remission; and that it succeeded best with those who had done it after the removal of the fever: in the same manner some used a full diet in the beginning of a disease; others were abstemious; and that those grew worse, who had eaten plentifully. These and the like instances daily occurring, that diligent men observed attentively, what method generally answered best, and afterwards began to prescribe the same to the sick. That this was the rise of the art of medicine, which by the frequent recovery of some, and the death of others, distinguishes what is pernicious from what is salutary; and that when the remedies were found, men began to discourse about the reasons of them: that medicine was not invented in consequence of their reasoning, but the theory was sought for after the discovery of medicine. They ask too, whether reason prescribes the same as experience, or something different; if the same, they infer it to be needless, if different, mischievous. That at first, however, there was a necessity for examining remedies with the greatest accuracy, but now they are sufficiently ascertained; and that we neither meet with any new kind of disease, nor want any new method of cure. That if some unknown distemper should occur, the physician would not therefore be obliged to have recourse to the occult things; but he would presently see to what distemper it is most nearly allied, and make trial of remedies like to those, which have often been successful in a similar malady, and by the resemblance between them would find some proper cure. For they do not affirm, that judgment is not necessary to a physician, and that an irrational animal is capable of practising this art; but that those conjectures, which relate to the occult things, are of no use; because it is no matter what causes, but what removes a distemper: nor is it of any importance in what manner the distribution is performed, but what is most easily distributed; whether concoction fails from this cause or that; or whether it be properly a concoction, or only a distribution: nor are we to inquire how we breathe, but what relieves a difficult and slow breathing; nor what is the cause of motion in the arteries, but what each kind of motion indicates. That these things are known by experience: that in all disputes of this kind, a good deal may be said on both sides; and therefore genius and eloquence obtain the victory in the dispute; but diseases are cured not by eloquence, but by remedies; so that if a person, without any eloquence, be well acquainted with those remedies, that have been discovered by practice, he will be a much greater physician than one who has cultivated his talent in speaking without experience. That these things, however, which have been mentioned, are only idle: but what remains is also cruel, to cut open the abdomen and præcordia of living men, and make that art, which presides over the health of mankind, the instrument, not only of inflicting death, but of doing it in the most horrid manner; especially if it be considered, that some of those things, which are sought after with so much barbarity, cannot be known at all, and others may be known without any cruelty; for that the colour, smoothness, softness, hardness, and such like, are not the same in a wounded body, as they were in a sound; and further, because these qualities, even in bodies that have suffered no external violence, are often changed by fear, grief, hunger, indigestion, fatigue, and a thousand other inconsiderable disorders; which makes it much more probable, that the internal parts, which are far more tender, and never exposed to the light itself, are changed by the severest wounds and mangling. And that nothing can be more ridiculous than to imagine any thing to be the same in a dying man, nay one already dead, as it is in a living person: for that the abdomen(8) indeed may be opened(9), while a man breathes; but as soon as the knife has reached the præcordia(10), and the transverse septum is cut, which by a kind of membrane divides the upper from the lower parts, (and by the Greeks is called the Diaphragm[AC]) the man immediately expires; and thus the præcordia, and all the viscera never come into the view of the butchering physician, till the man is dead; and they must necessarily appear as those of a dead person, and not as they were while he lived; and thus the physician gains only the opportunity of murdering a man cruelly, and not of observing, what are the appearances of the viscera in a living person: if, however, there be any thing which can be observed in a person, that yet breathes, chance often throws it in the way of such as practise the healing art; for that sometimes a gladiator on the stage, a soldier in the field, or a traveller beset by robbers, is so wounded, that some internal part, different in different people, may be exposed to view; and thus a prudent physician finds their situation, position, order, figure, and the other particulars he wants to know, not perpetrating murder, but attempting to give health; and learns that, by compassion, which others had discovered by horrid cruelty. That for these reasons it is not necessary to lacerate even dead bodies; which, though not cruel, yet may be shocking to the sight, since most things are different in dead bodies; and even the dressing of wounds shows all that can be discovered in the living.