Medicine and philosophy - Classical Homeopathy Online

96 Hippocratic Corpus and Diocles of Carystusdifferent from the ones given by Aristotle and Theophrastus. The latter areeither – in the case of real undemonstrable principles such as definitionsor logical postulates – concerned with the avoidance of an infinite regressor with the consideration that within the limits of a particular branch ofstudy some things should be accepted as starting-points, the demonstrationof which belongs to another discipline: the ignorance of this is seenby them as a sign of ‘being uneducated’ (). While Aristotle’swarnings against pursuing causal analysis too far in these latter contextslook like methodological prescriptions based on considerations of fruitfulnessand economy (one should not ask for a cause here because it isuseless – although it may be possible to state one), Diocles’ point is thatin the field of dietetics many things simply do not allow of explanation,because when pursuing the search for causes too far, one passes the level ofthe ‘whole nature’ of a foodstuff and loses the connection with the actualexplanandum.On the other hand, it is not unlikely that some sort of contact betweenDiocles and the Lyceum took place. Diocles enjoyed a good reputationin Athens – although our source for this does not specify in what timeshe did. 48 Moreover, there is the reference to a Diocles in Theophrastus’On Stones 5 (fr. 239a). It has been doubted whether this should be takenas applying to the Carystian physician, seeing that the name Diocles wasvery common in Greek and that several persons named Diocles in fourthcenturyAthens are known from literary and epigraphical sources. 49 Yet I donot see any compelling reason against assuming that the Diocles to whomTheophrastus refers is identical with the Carystian physician. The fact thathe is credited by Theophrastus with an opinion on a mineralogical topic isa weak argument, which is based on doubtful presuppositions concerninga ‘division of labour’ between the sciences. Diocles may have had variousinterests, just as Theophrastus himself, or Aristotle, or the authors of such48 (Pseudo-)Vindicianus, On the Seed 2: ‘Diocles, a follower of Hippocrates, whom the Atheniansgave the name of younger Hippocrates’ (Diocles, sectator Hippocratis, quem Athenienses iunioremHippocratem vocaverunt). The use of the Attic dialect may be an indication that Diocles lived orpractised in Athens (although several fragments preserved in Oribasius also – in some manuscripts –show Ionic forms [see van der Eijk 2001a, xxiv n. 51]); but the characterisations by Kullmann (1974,350: ‘Der in Athen lebende Arzt Diokles’) and Wöhrle (1990, 177: ‘Die Weltstadt Athen, in derDiokles lebte’) go beyond what is known with certainty.49 See Edelstein (1940) 483–9; Kudlien (1963) 462ff.; von Staden (1992) 252–4. The fact that Theophrastusrefers to Diocles without further specification is regarded by Eichholz as evidence that the Carystianis meant (1965) 107–8; but this argument will not do, for two different people named Dioclesare also mentioned in the will of the Peripatetic Strato (Diogenes Laertius 5.62–3). We can only saythat it must have been evident to Theophrastus and his audience which Diocles was meant [see vander Eijk (2001a) 416–19].