Empiric school

Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

The Empiric school of

Glaucias, Heraclides, Bacchius, Zeuxis, Menodotus, Theodas, Herodotus of Tarsus, Aeschrion, Sextus Empiricus, and Marcellus Empiricus. The sect survived a long time, as Marcellus lived in the 4th century AD. The doctrines of this school are described by Aulus Cornelius Celsus in the introduction to his De Medicina
.

Doctrines

The Empiric school said that it was necessary to understand the evident causes of disease, but considered the inquiry after the hidden causes and natural actions to be fruitless, because

philosophers and physicians, and in the way in which the methods of practice differed from place to place, one method being used in Rome, another in Egypt, and another in Gaul. Often too, the causes are evident; as in a wound
, and if the evident cause does not suggest a method of curing, then much less so other obscure methods. This being the case, it is much better to seek relief from things certain and tried; that is, from remedies as learned from experience.

They said that medicine, in its infancy, was deduced from experiments; for the sick, in a time when there were no physicians, had either taken food in the first days of their illness, or had abstained, and that the illness was more quickly alleviated in one group than the other. This and other instances occurring daily were observed by people diligent enough to realize which method was best to cure particular conditions, and hence the art of medicine arose. Medicine was not invented in consequence of reasoning, but that theory was sought after the discovery of medicine.

They asked, too, whether reason prescribed the same as experience, or something different: if the same, then it is not necessary; if different, then mischievous. Initially there was a necessity to examine

illness
, the physician would not recourse to obscure knowledge, but would see what type of illness was most nearly allied, and to make a trial of the medicines used to treat the allied condition.

What matters is not what causes, but what cures the condition. It does not matter why a concoction works, only that it does work. Nor is it necessary to know how we

dissecting
dead bodies, since the state of the organs are very different in dead bodies compared to living ones.

They supported their opinions in favour of experience with the famous "Tripod of Medicine":

  • Observation: The observations which the patient had made in the course of the illness concerning the course of the disease and results of any treatments.
  • History: A written collection of observations made by others.
  • Analogy: When treating a new illness, selecting a plan of treatment by comparing it with a known disease which most resembled it.

See also

References

  1. ^ Heinrich von Staden, Herophilus: The Art of Medicine in Early Alexandria: Edition, Translation Cambridge University Press, 2008, p. xiii)
  • William Smith, (1857),
    Dictionary of Greek and Roman Antiquities
    , pages 401-3

External links