MEDICINE AND PHILOSOPHY IN CLASSICAL ANTIQUITY

(Ron) #1
122 Hippocratic Corpus and Diocles of Carystus

Aurelianus is referring concerns the so-calledhegemonikon ̄ orregale. This

term is probably of Stoic origin (c.300 b c e) and refers to the ‘leading’

principle in the soul (commonly indicated asnousorintellectus, which is

usually translated as ‘thought’ or ‘intellect’). The use of this term implies

the possibility of grading various psychic parts or faculties, some of which

are subordinate to others, and presupposes an anatomical and physiological

relationship underlying such a hierarchy. On the one hand such a presen-

tation presupposes a rather elaborate psychological theory, free from the

difficulties and obscurities that, for instance, Aristotle points out when he

discusses the psychological views of his predecessors in the first book of his

On the Soul(De anima). It will be clear that a presentation such as that

by Caelius Aurelianus, in which all doctors and philosophers are called to

the fore to express their views on the matter, puts opinions in their mouths

that many of them (probably) never phrased in these terms. On the other

hand, such a presentation does not do justice to thinkers such as Aris-

totle and some authors of the Hippocratic Corpus, as it often obscures the

subtle differences in meaning between the various terms used for psychic

faculties by these thinkers. We will see below that as early as the fifth and

fourth centuriesbce, doctors and philosophers carefully differentiated be-

tween cognitive faculties such as ‘practical’, ‘theoretical’, and ‘productive

thinking’; ‘insight’; ‘understanding’; ‘opinion’; and ‘judgement’.^9 Indeed,

the possibility of location was a matter of dispute too. Thus Aristotle was

credited in late antiquity with the view that ‘the soul’, or at least its leading

principle (thearche ̄), is seated in the heart. We will see that this is a mis-

representation of Aristotle’s views, which, strictly speaking, leave no room

for location of the highest psychic faculty, thenous. Similarly, the author

of the Hippocratic workOn Regimen(at the start of the fourth century

bce) presupposes a view of the soul that does not specify where exactly it is

located in the body; he even appears to assume that the location may vary.

In short, this doxographic distortion attributes to doctors and philosophers

answers to questions which some of them would not even be able or willing

to answer as a matter of principle.

Finally, Caelius Aurelianus upholds a long tradition of contempt for

the so-calledphusiologia. This tradition dates back to the author of the

Hippocratic writingOn Ancient Medicine(c.400 b c e). He was opposed

to some of his colleagues’ tendency to build their medical practice on

general and theoretical principles or ‘postulates’ (hupotheseis) derived from

(^9) Aristotle lists a range of terms for cognitive faculties (nous,phronesis ̄ ,epistem ̄e ̄,sophia,gnom ̄e ̄,sunesis,
doxa,hupolepsis ̄ ) in book 6 of theNicomachean Ethics; however, it remains uncertain to what extent
the subtle differences in meaning that Aristotle ascribes to these terms are representative for Greek
language in general.

Free download pdf