Medicine and philosophy - Classical Homeopathy Online

150 Aristotle and his schoolfor the reckless type. In lines 27–8, the lack of self-control of melancholics(i.e. their recklessness) is said to be easier to cure (euiatotera) than the lackof self-control of those who deliberate but who do not act upon their deliberations(i.e. the weak). This corresponds to 1151 a 1–5; 40 yet the nextsentence is confusing, for Aristotle continues by saying that those who lackself-control out of habit (ethismos) are easier to cure than those who lackself-control by nature (tōn phusikōn). Does this new differentiation (habitvs. nature) correspond to the recklessness – weakness we already know? Yetthat would imply that melancholy is not a natural predisposition (as theremark on the melancholikē phusis in Div. somn. 463 b 17 suggests) but anattitude (hexis) acquired by habit, and that the characterisation hoi melancholikoiwould not refer to the nature but to the character of the person.But this text may in fact refer to a subcategory of the reckless type in whichmelancholics are to be regarded as ‘reckless by nature’. 41 Anyhow, Aristotle’sargumentation is not entirely clear here, and it may well be that the classificationof melancholics as belonging to the second type (weakness) in thepseudo-Aristotelian Great Ethics (Magna moralia, Mag. mor. 1203 b 1–2) isbased on this passage. 42The last occurrence of the melancholics can be found in the section thatfollows (Eth. Nic. 7.12–15), in which Aristotle discusses pleasure (hēdonē).In 1154 a 26 he asks the question why physical pleasure seems more desirablethan other pleasures. The first reason he gives is that it drives away pain(lupē) and functions, as it were, as a cure against it. The second reason (1154b 3) is that because of its intensity (sphodra) it is pursued by people whoare unable to enjoy any other pleasure and who perceive even their normalstate (in which there is neither pleasure nor pain) as painful.40 Croissant’s remark (1932, 41 n. 2) that the melancholics are categorised as the other type (astheneia)is based on an incorrect interpretation: is a genitiveof comparison. This incorrect interpretation may also be the reason why melancholics are said tobelong to the weakness category by the author of Mag. mor. 1203 b 1–2 (see below).41 In this respect the remark by Plato (Republic 573 c 7–9) is worth noting: the tyrant can become‘prone to drinking, sex and melancholy either by nature, or by his activities, or by both’ 42 ‘This type of weakness of will [i.e. recklessness, propeteia] would seem to be not altogether blameworthy,for it is also found in respectable people, in those who are hot and those who are naturallygifted ; the other type occurs in people who are cold and melancholic , and these are blameworthy.’ This contradiction can only besolved by taking into account the fluctuations in the temperature of black bile which are possibleaccording to Pr. 954 a 14ff. However, this offers no explanation for the prototypical use of hoi melancholikoito refer to both the reckless type in Eth. Nic. 7 (which, incidentally, does not mention heatand cold) and the weak type in Magna moralia. Dirlmeier (1958, 390) and Flashar (1962, 713) discussthis issue. As the authenticity of the Magna moralia is still disputed (see for the latest debate theworks of Cooper (1973) 327–49 and Rowe (1975) 160–72), I will not go into this complication here(for the possible origin of the contradiction see n. 40 above).