Restoration
|
|
|
|
Chapter II What Is Medicine? Medical history covers a vast
segment, if not the whole, of man’s existence. Contrary to this acknowledged fact, historians persist in dating
“reliable” medicine no earlier than Hippocrates! The REASON for this is significant! The year 500 B.C., is the edge
of a precipice in history. Beyond this
date lies a vast abyss of human experience heavily charged with the odious
phenomenon of supernatural intervention.
Within this abyss, medicine was
an art! The modern explanation is
that since 500 B.C., it is a SCIENCE!
Such a sudden transformation would be a miracle in itself! Yet,
this hypothesis has been generally accepted — and readily so. The truth of history is that
THERE HAS BEEN NO SUCH TRANSFORMATION!
The practice of medicine (i.e., the use of and dependence on
chemotherapy and surgery to treat the sick) has remained consistent from its origin!
One reason this has not been easily recognized is that the consistency
of medicine lies in its inconsistency. Eras APPEAR to come and go; major
transformations APPEAR to have occurred. Notice the comment of one
historian: “The development of [this]
science has never been continuous,
nor even progressive, but rather like a tangled, tortuous line . . .” (Garrison, History of Medicine, p. 45). The history of medicine is a
history of human fal An Art or a Science? At Of recent date, medicine has
even received distinction as a science. In fact, since 1935 — the time of the
acceptance of the antibiotic — medicine has been referred to exclusively as a science. Since the practice of medicine is closely
associated with, and currently employs many actual sciences such as
chemistry, physics, physiology, etc., it is generally assumed that medicine
is also a legitimate science. However, medicine is not a true science, but an ART! Notice this comment! Medicine is not only a science; it is
also AN ART. Science is primarily analytic, art primarily synthetic. And medicine is likely to remain AN ART, however hard we may try to make it more
and more scientific . . . . For
medicine deals not with impersonal atoms, elements . . . but with humans . .
. . In practice he [the physician] deals not with disordered metabolisms,
specific infections . . . but with sick human individuals. Even the effect of digitalis, or
antibiotics, will partially depend on the human relationship between the
doctor and his patient, not to speak of treatment of the “psychosomatic” diseases that will usually
form from 50 to 70 per cent of the doctor’s practice. Science, so far, has contributed little to
this aspect of the doctor’s work (Ackerknecht, A Short History of Medicine, p. XVI). Certainly, the practice of
medicine is associated with numerous sciences, and has for its province the
treatment of disease, but this does not
insure its role as a specific science.
Even the word “medicine” or, in the Latin, medicina (from the Latin mederi, to
heal) actually means the ART OF HEALING!
Once again, the religiously-oriented foundation of medicine is
interjected as healing has
traditionally been the prerogative of the supernatural. Even a historian of renown as Herodotus,
writing centuries nearer its origin, describes this practice as “the art of medicine” (Herodotus, The History of the Greek and Persian Wars,
ii, p. 84). Most medical historians are
doctors, and consequently take a subjective view of the subject. It is their desire to be rated on a par
with the sciences — not just a fellow traveler. This causes them to disclaim their heritage and not allow “modern”
medicine to be subjected to association with its ancient counterpart! Throughout history, medicine has unquestionably
been an art, which was dependent upon the supernatural. Such a relationship in any facet of life is
odious to our society. We pride
ourselves on emancipation from superstition.
Therefore, every effort has been made to discredit the ancient supernatural
origin of medicine, and to assume an empiric beginning of recent date: the
Age of Hippocrates. Whether recognized
or not, this is the reason Hippocrates was chosen the Father of Medicine! Hippocrates, should he know of the
appellation, would be quite surprised indeed! Nevertheless, the age of
Hippocrates has become a milestone to the medical historian because it was
then among the ancient Greeks that the
first complete separation of religion and medicine took place. It was they who first sought to remove the
supernatural fro However, it was a step that was
not maintained, for although the Greeks treated medicine as an empirical
practice, it was not held at this level!
One is led to believe that from the Golden Age of Greece, medicine has
continued onward and upward. But such
is not the case! After the decline of
Greece, medicine returned to the Break With The Supernatural To properly understand the
history of medicine — what it
originally was, as well as what it is today — it is necessary to
understand the break with the ancient world and the supernatural. Actually it is not so much a definite break
with the spirit world as a continual effort to wrench away! Originally, from the days of the
Old Kingdom of Egypt, the practice of medicine was supernaturally
sponsored. Medicine was exclusively in the hands of the priests! “. . . the priests
were the sole possessors of physico-medical knowledge. . . . It was necessary before gaining mastery
over the powers of nature to become initiated into the mysteries. . . .” Once duly initiated, the priest “was able
to practice medicine” (Magnus, Superstition
In Medicine, pp. 9-11). This had been the strict regime
of medical practice for over 1500 years!
Yet, Hippocrates, apparently, sought to change it! WHY?
This question has never been fully answered! “It has never been fully explained why all of a sudden, more than twenty-five
hundred years ago, a small group of people in the Eastern Mediterranean took
this important and radical step in
human thought” (Ackerknecht, A Short History of Medicine, p. 42). What
Provoked Such a Radical Departure? The departure from the old ways
was revolutionary, but it did not occur overnight. “The change in opinion was rather wrought
by a gradual recession from the idea that the gods interfered with the proper
course of man’s bodily functions” (Magnus, Superstition In Medicine, p. 16).
Although initiated about the fifth century B.C., the overthrow of the
ancient period is not considered complete until about the sixth century
A.D. It was during this period of time
that an amazing revolution, (possibly begun by Hippocrates) took place. The understanding of this
important period bridges the gap between our age based on the physical, the
empirical, and the ancient world, which relied on the intervention of the
supernatural! History teaches that the methods used to treat the ill did not
change! Only the APPROACH to
medical practice was altered. “This
great discovery was not itself a cure or a means of preventing disease; it was merely a new way of studying
disease.” In brief it was a NEW
“PHILOSOPHY” (Haggard, The Doctor in
History, p. 59). The empirical approach is so vastly
different from the supernatural that man has deceived himself into believing
the system and the principles underlying the two practices are also at equal
extremes. By 500 B.C., the practice of medicine under the ancient
system had deteriorated seriously! “The decadence of the arts and sciences was accompanied by a
deterioration of medicine also” (Castiglioni,
A History of Medicine, p. 62). Wars, political upheavals, natural catastrophes, and other traumatic events had taken their toll. Medicine had openly become the tool of charlatans, a superstitious farce! It is within this hopeless
environment, just prior to Hippocrates, “we find the various branches of
medicine engrossed chiefly by the priests, among whom a spirit of rivalry started up. . . . Thus these temples became
progressively converted into schools of medicine, varying in excellence, as they did in reputation, exhibiting
instances of During this period fewer and
fewer cures were reported. When un “Thus the foundation was laid for that great revolution in medicine . . . which,
by detaching medicine from the science of theology, emancipated it by degrees
from . . . superstition” (ibid., p.
42). Man’s Approach to Life Changes! Suddenly man Having relied on such a
relationship for centuries, the absence of it left mankind hopelessly
adrift. No one knew where to
turn. It is to this era of desperation that we owe the dawn
of philosophy. Questions often asked by the Sophists of the fifth century B.C.,
amply demonstrate how totally lost and confused they were. The apex
of intellectual curiosity reached at that time only enabled them to ask
feebly: “Is truth The Greeks faced a dilemma — the
result of which would be the medical heritage of ages to come. They had inherited an approach to medicine, which was now failing to work. Hippocrates never lost faith in the
efficacy of drugs and surgery. But he did lose faith in dependence on the
supernatural to guide him in the use of medicine — as the mysteries
taught the ancients to do. Hippocrates simply resorted to
the only alternative, which remained.
Stripped of supernatural intervention, it became necessary to depend solely on the principle of careful
observation guided by human intuition.
So, “all the knowledge that physicians have gained of
disease since the time of Hippocrates has been acquired by following the principle he laid down — careful observation” (Haggard, The Doctor in
History, p. 67). The belief in this new approach
to life gained prominence until it eventually dominated Medicine Remains the Same The age of Hippocrates was a beginning, not the beginning! It is un However, a definite break with
the past did occur between 500 B.C., and A.D. 500 — beginning with the Age of Hippocrates! This was a strange, but a general
phenomenon, affecting the approach to all facets of life. In regard to medicine, supernatural
intervention and authority were discarded in favor of observation as weighed
by human reason. Contrary to opinion, this did not change the actual practice of
medicine! Physicians continued to
fervently believe in the use of basic medical procedures: MEDICATIONS and SURGERY. The notable alternative was the deletion of meaningless mysticism,
which had developed between 1500-500 B.C. As we will see, medical practice was more
nearly reverting to the type of practice originally developed. Even the Greeks soon In spite of the efforts of
medical historians to trace the commencement of modern medicine to a more
recent “scientific” origin, this ancient practice was a fundamental ART
developed in the Old Kingdom of Egypt;
it was still an art in the time of Hippocrates
and it remains basically the same art
today — not a true science! Over this
vast expanse of time, only the approach
to medicine has changed. |
