When I use a word . . . Aphrodisiacs—taxonomy and doctrines

The definition of an aphrodisiac in the Oxford English Dictionary is “A drug or preparation inducing sexual desire”; and “preparation” is defined as “A specially prepared or made up substance, as a medicine, cosmetic, foodstuff, etc.” However, these definitions, taken in conjunction, do not cover all the items that have been proposed to have aphrodisiac properties at one time or another. They include: aromas; styles of dress; honeyed words, lewd or titillating pictorial representations, plays, verses, songs, or dances; and behaviours, such as glances, gestures, and other forms of body language. About a half of all supposed aphrodisiacs are based on plants and plant products, including trees, herbs, fungi, fruits, nuts, and vegetables, and another one fifth are based on animals and animal products, including land animals, sea creatures, birds, and insects. The rest can be categorised as foodstuffs and additives; medicines; appearances and behaviours, including language, body language, singing, and dancing; elements, minerals, gemstones, and resins; alcoholic drinks; aromas; charms; and human products. Certain doctrines have in the past been used to justify claims that substances are aphrodisiacs. The Doctrine of Signatures asserts that certain plants, animals, and minerals have distinctive features, particularly marks, shapes, or colours, often considered God-given, that indicate their medicinal properties. The Doctrine of Similars asserts that anything that resembles something else can be used in the same way. And the Doctrine of Analogy asserts that if a substance of a particular kind has an effect, another substance of the same kind is likely to share that property. An aphrodisiac is defined in the Oxford English Dictionary ( OED ) as “A drug or preparation inducing sexual desire.”1 And in its adjectival sense it is defined as “Of or relating to sexual desire: that tends to increase sexual desire.” But these definitions do not do justice …