298 Late antiquity
may suggest the idea of a systematical elimination of all the other incidental
variables that may interfere with the process of change and determine the
actual outcome. Related to this problem is the disagreement as to whether
should be translated as ‘experience’ rather than as ‘experiment’ – an
issue which is closely connected with the question whether is used
as a heuristic instrument for the discovery of hitherto unknown facts, or as
a critical instrument in order to check whether analready existentview or
claim about the effect of a foodstuff or drug is correct.
It is impossible, within the scope of this chapter, to go into the details of
all these questions – although it should be said that there are certainly pas-
sages in Galen’s pharmacological works where we see him actually describing
what one may call without hesitation an attempt at experimentation in the
modern sense.^80 In any case Galen’s insistence on aqualifieduse of expe-
rience strongly suggests that he is, at leasttheoretically, rather close to the
modern concept of experiment. The texts discussed above have shown that
qualified experience is used both for judging whether a particular, already
existent view on the power of a foodstuff or drug is true and for making
new discoveries.^81 This may now be well understood: to refute a view in a
correct way presupposes the same knowledge of determining circumstances
as interpreting the result of an empirical test as a new and significant dis-
covery. A scientist using a counter-example in order to falsify an hypothesis
should ensure that the counter-example is actually a good example. That
Galen himself does not always live up to this latter requirement in actual
practice, is another story.
(^80) See, e.g.,De simpl. med. fac. 1. 21 ( 11. 418 K.).
(^81) Heuristic:De alim. facult. 1. 12. 1 ;De simpl. med. fac. 4. 19 ; 4. 23 ; 6. 1 ; critical:De alim. facult. 1. 1. 46 ;
De simpl. med. fac. 3. 13 ; 7. 10.