Medicine and philosophy - Classical Homeopathy Online

294 Late antiquitydistinction Galen makes between foodstuff, drug and poison depends onthis very issue, for this is a functional distinction depending on whether asubstance just preserves the body in the state it already has, or whether itbrings about a change in the state of the body. 64 Thus the whole corpus ofdietetic and pharmacological knowledge would consist of a systematic setof statements () defining precisely what a certain substance, undercertain circumstances, when applied to a certain kind of patients and in thecase of a certain kind of bodily affection may bring about, thus coveringand explaining all effects a substance may bring about in various types ofcases. 65However, this does raise a problem concerning the philosophical conceptualisationof what is going on in these different cases. Since the primaryquestion the pharmacologist has to face is that of the power ()a particular substance has, one might ask how the power of a substanceproducing different results under different circumstances is to be defined:should we speak of one power present in the substance but not always beingrealised, that, is of one power whose realisation is impeded or disturbedby interfering circumstances? Or should we rather speak of several different,evenopposed powers in one and the same substance, that is, different64 See Harig (1974) 92: ‘In Abhängigkeit von der Eigentümlichkeit der verschiedenen Physeis kanndarum jede eingenommene Substanz entweder die Eigenschaft des Pharmakons oder die der Nahrungoder die von beiden haben.’ As Harig points out (pp. 93–4), there is, again, heavy Aristotelian (orat least Peripatetic) influence to be recorded here (he refers to Ps.-Arist. Plant. 820 b 5f.; Pr. 864 a26–30; b8–11; 865 a 6f.; 9–18; Oec. 1344 b 10f.).65 For an example of such statements see De simpl. med. fac. 1.4 (11.388 K.), where we can actuallyfollow Galen tentatively formulating a statement with a growing degree of exactness, using the verb to denote the addition of important specifications: ‘But if we do not at some point inone’s statement add the word “fresh”, but simply say “in so far as water is cold in itself”, one shouldnot be pedantic and criticise us for having made a statement that is deficient or lacking qualification’ ’ ’ . For anotherexample see De alim. facult. 1.1.33 (CMG v4, 2,p.212.2–11 Helmreich, 6.472 K.): ‘One cannot forgivedoctors who leave many of their most useful theoretical points without qualification. For they shouldnot state without qualification that rock fish are easily digestible for most people although somepeople are found to digest beef more easily, but one should qualify both groups, just as with honeyone should not make statements without qualification, but with the addition to which age-groupsand which natural constitutions it is beneficial or harmful, and in which seasons or places or modesof life. For example, one would have to say that it is most damaging to dry and hot people, andmost beneficial to those who are moist and cold, whether they have such a temperament throughage, or natural constitution, or place, or season, or mode of life, etc.’ ’ , , , ’ . Cf.De comp. med. sec. loc. 5.1 (12.807 K.).