[希波克拉底论著《古代医学》中的反哲学人类学]。

Masahiro Imai
{"title":"[希波克拉底论著《古代医学》中的反哲学人类学]。","authors":"Masahiro Imai","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The Hippocratic treatise De Vetere Medicina (On Ancient Medicine) has been the focus of attention among classical scholars and historians of medicine. The author attacks in ch. 20 doctors and sophists who base their own medical theories and methods on philosophical anthropology taken from the contemporary natural philosophers. Many attempts have been made to elucidate, as opposed to their philosophical inquiry into human nature, the author's way of understanding it, which still remains unclear. I draw attention to the following points to make it clear that the conceptual framework of the author's medical anthropology is different from theirs. Their philosophical inquiry into human nature has its starting point in fundamental element(s), from which human beings were originally formed. The author focuses on human beings as existent in their present states, whose conditions and functions must be investigated through interrelations between them and their external factors, such as foods and drinks. A medical investigation into the interrelations will give us a scientific idea about human body, whose constituents are taken to be a large number of humors, reacting against some external factors and accordingly making us feel pain. This may presuppose that, in the author's medical anthropology, human body is conceptually demarcated as the physical or material aspect of human being, within which all physiological events depending on external factors and the humors take place. In their philosophical anthropology, however, human body doesn't seem to have been clearly conceptualized as such, because our experience of feeling pain should be judged to take place within the actions of the fundamental element(s), which must be supposed to constitute our cognitive self.</p>","PeriodicalId":81754,"journal":{"name":"Kagakushi kenkyu. [Journal of the history of science, Japan","volume":"46 242","pages":"78-90"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2007-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"[The anti-philosophical anthropology in the Hippocratic treatise De Vetere Medicina (On Ancient Medicine)].\",\"authors\":\"Masahiro Imai\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The Hippocratic treatise De Vetere Medicina (On Ancient Medicine) has been the focus of attention among classical scholars and historians of medicine. The author attacks in ch. 20 doctors and sophists who base their own medical theories and methods on philosophical anthropology taken from the contemporary natural philosophers. Many attempts have been made to elucidate, as opposed to their philosophical inquiry into human nature, the author's way of understanding it, which still remains unclear. I draw attention to the following points to make it clear that the conceptual framework of the author's medical anthropology is different from theirs. Their philosophical inquiry into human nature has its starting point in fundamental element(s), from which human beings were originally formed. The author focuses on human beings as existent in their present states, whose conditions and functions must be investigated through interrelations between them and their external factors, such as foods and drinks. A medical investigation into the interrelations will give us a scientific idea about human body, whose constituents are taken to be a large number of humors, reacting against some external factors and accordingly making us feel pain. This may presuppose that, in the author's medical anthropology, human body is conceptually demarcated as the physical or material aspect of human being, within which all physiological events depending on external factors and the humors take place. In their philosophical anthropology, however, human body doesn't seem to have been clearly conceptualized as such, because our experience of feeling pain should be judged to take place within the actions of the fundamental element(s), which must be supposed to constitute our cognitive self.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":81754,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Kagakushi kenkyu. [Journal of the history of science, Japan\",\"volume\":\"46 242\",\"pages\":\"78-90\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2007-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Kagakushi kenkyu. [Journal of the history of science, Japan\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Kagakushi kenkyu. [Journal of the history of science, Japan","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

希波克拉底的论文De Vetere Medicina(论古代医学)一直是古典学者和医学历史学家关注的焦点。作者在第20章中抨击了那些将自己的医学理论和方法建立在借鉴当代自然哲学家的哲学人类学基础上的医生和诡辩家。与他们对人性的哲学探究相反,许多人试图阐明作者对人性的理解方式,这一点至今仍不清楚。我提请注意以下几点,以表明作者的医学人类学的概念框架与他们的不同。他们对人性的哲学探究,其出发点是人类最初形成的基本要素。作者关注的是存在于当前状态的人,必须通过他们与外部因素(如食物和饮料)之间的相互关系来研究他们的条件和功能。对这些相互关系的医学调查将使我们对人体有一个科学的认识,人体的成分被认为是大量的体液,它们对一些外部因素作出反应,从而使我们感到疼痛。这可能预先假定,在提交人的医学人类学中,人体在概念上被界定为人的身体或物质方面,所有依赖于外部因素和体液的生理事件都在其中发生。然而,在他们的哲学人类学中,人体似乎并没有被明确地概念化,因为我们对疼痛的感受应该被判断为发生在基本元素的行动中,而这些基本元素必须被认为构成我们的认知自我。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
[The anti-philosophical anthropology in the Hippocratic treatise De Vetere Medicina (On Ancient Medicine)].

The Hippocratic treatise De Vetere Medicina (On Ancient Medicine) has been the focus of attention among classical scholars and historians of medicine. The author attacks in ch. 20 doctors and sophists who base their own medical theories and methods on philosophical anthropology taken from the contemporary natural philosophers. Many attempts have been made to elucidate, as opposed to their philosophical inquiry into human nature, the author's way of understanding it, which still remains unclear. I draw attention to the following points to make it clear that the conceptual framework of the author's medical anthropology is different from theirs. Their philosophical inquiry into human nature has its starting point in fundamental element(s), from which human beings were originally formed. The author focuses on human beings as existent in their present states, whose conditions and functions must be investigated through interrelations between them and their external factors, such as foods and drinks. A medical investigation into the interrelations will give us a scientific idea about human body, whose constituents are taken to be a large number of humors, reacting against some external factors and accordingly making us feel pain. This may presuppose that, in the author's medical anthropology, human body is conceptually demarcated as the physical or material aspect of human being, within which all physiological events depending on external factors and the humors take place. In their philosophical anthropology, however, human body doesn't seem to have been clearly conceptualized as such, because our experience of feeling pain should be judged to take place within the actions of the fundamental element(s), which must be supposed to constitute our cognitive self.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信