Now, after reading the Nibley article, I hesitate to cite Hippocrates... but it should be known that he is considered the "father of medicine". In both Greece and India (I'm only gonna focus on Greece because their customs have actually stuck with us in Western culture), medicine was more effective than in Egypt or Mesopotamia. Yes, these civilizations formed hundreds of years later so they began with that advantage but what made Greece and India special in the way they treated diseases was that they tried new things and observed the various reactions to their treatments. This development wasn't just a big step for medicine, it was a giant leap for the world of science. One of the advancements that Hippocrates began was categorizing illnesses, rather than having a "one treatment fits all" attitude of most other civilizations of the time. Hippocrates named four categories that physicians would label their patients with: acute, chronic, endemic, and epidemic. He also began the Hippocratic oath which is still somewhat relevant today:
"I swear by Apollo, the healer, Asclepius, Hygieia, and Panacea, and I take to witness all the gods, all the goddesses, to keep according to my ability and my judgment, the following Oath and agreement:To consider dear to me, as my parents, him who taught me this art; to live in common with him and, if necessary, to share my goods with him; To look upon his children as my own brothers, to teach them this art.
I will prescribe regimens for the good of my patients according to my ability and my judgment and never do harm to anyone.
I will not give a lethal drug to anyone if I am asked, nor will I advise such a plan; and similarly I will not give a woman a pessary to cause an abortion.
But I will preserve the purity of my life and my arts.
I will not cut for stone, even for patients in whom the disease is manifest; I will leave this operation to be performed by practitioners, specialists in this art.
In every house where I come I will enter only for the good of my patients, keeping myself far from all intentional ill-doing and all seduction and especially from the pleasures of love with women or with men, be they free or slaves.
All that may come to my knowledge in the exercise of my profession or in daily commerce with men, which ought not to be spread abroad, I will keep secret and will never reveal.
If I keep this oath faithfully, may I enjoy my life and practice my art, respected by all men and in all times; but if Iswerve from it or violate it, may the reverse be my lot."
I guess the point of all this is that medicinal practices only began advancing when people decided to take a new approach. Instead of treating people the same way, or continually using ineffective practices, the Greeks decided to try new things and if treatments didn't work, they stopped using them. That legacy should speak to us in every aspect of our lives, not just in the way we "cure" ourselves. By rejecting "traditional authority" (old and ineffective folk knowledge begun by some old, prominent authority in the past) they were able to actually help more people.
It is interesting to note that in societys with poor health care only the stronget people survived. That's kind of obvious but the result is a people who very strong and powerful. They have a strong immune system and have great physical prowess.
ReplyDeleteOnly in civilizations with good health care can people with less vibrant genes survive.
I liked how you pointed out that without change or experimentation- nothing will improve. I think that could be applied to many people (myself included). Too often do we wallow in self pity and we don't realize that things won't get better just sitting there- we have to do something to change our situation. And often our attitude is what needs to be changed the most.
ReplyDeleteI think that the experimentation and development is a great to point out. The greeks did a great job of that. Something i've thought about but am not quite to sure about it, but as a folk knowledge grows and develops it would seem that it potentially could end up not being a folk knowledge due to the vast amount of knowledge that is required to understand it or i guess certain things would get lost in the transfer. I would imagine that many medicinal practices from older times that have now since been developed and have grown no longer can just be passed down through family traditions or what have you. I hope this makes sense, it's somewhat hard to explain.
ReplyDeleteI think it is interesting that nowadays people may learn how to practice medicine from large institutions, but it still retains a tiny bit of that folk knowledge feel to it. You don't learn how to draw blood simply by reading about it, someone also sort of has to teach you how to do it practically. You read about it, then your instructor demonstrates while you watch. Then your instructor watches and critiques you as you practice on whichever lucky classmate happens to be the victim of your first blood draw (for the record, I got it on my first try. The person practicing on me poked me 5 times before giving up).
ReplyDeleteI think it's interesting that before being a doctor they would try and weed out those who would practice for malicious reasons. Although it's not formal, I think the crazy amount of school needed to enter the job almost creates the same sort of qualification.
ReplyDelete