General Anatomy, Applied to Physiology and Medicine, Vol. 1 (of 3) — John Shaqi
General Anatomy, Applied to Physiology and Medicine, Vol. 1 (of 3)Bichat, Xavier
Science
General Anatomy, Applied to Physiology and Medicine, Vol. 1 (of 3)
Bichat, Xavier
Human anatomy; Human physiology
Stahl, less brilliant than profound, rich in the means that convince,
though deficient in those that please, formed for the physiological
sciences an epoch more worthy of notice than that of Boerhaave. He
perceived the discordance between the physical laws and the functions
of animals; this was the first step towards the discovery of the vital
laws, but he did not discover them. The soul was to him every thing in
the phenomena of life; it was much to neglect attraction and impulse.
Stahl perceived that these were not true, but the truth escaped him.
Many authors, following his steps, have referred to a single principle,
differently denominated by each, all the vital phenomena. This, called
the vital principle by Barthez, archeus by Van Helmont, &c. is a
speculation that has no more reality than that which would refer to
a single principle all the physical phenomena. Among these we know
that some are derived from gravity, some from elasticity, others from
affinity, &c. The same in the living economy, some are derived from
sensibility, others from contractility.
Unknown to the ancients, the laws of life have begun to be understood
during the last age only. Stahl had already remarked the tonic
motions, but he did not generalize their influence. Haller was engaged
particularly with sensibility and irritability; but in limiting one to
the nervous system, and the other to the muscular, this great man did
not consider them in the correct point of view; he made them almost
insulated properties. Vicq d'Azyr changed them into functions in his
physiological division and ranked them with ossification, digestion,
&c. that is, he confounded the principle with the consequence. Thus you
see, notwithstanding the labours of a crowd of learned men, how much
the physiological sciences still differ from the physical. In these,
the chemist refers all the phenomena that he observes to affinity:
the natural philosopher, in his science, every where sees gravity,
elasticity, &c. In the others, we have not as yet ascended, at least
in a general manner, from the phenomena to the properties from which
they are derived. Digestion, circulation, or the sensations, do not
bring the idea of sensibility or contractility to the mind of the
physiologist, as the movement of a watch proves to the mechanician
that elasticity is the primum mobile of its motion; or as the wheel of
a mill or of any machine, which running water sets in motion, proves
to the natural philosopher that gravity is the cause. To place upon
the same level in this respect these two classes of sciences, it is
evidently necessary to form a just idea of vital properties. If their
limits are not accurately assigned, we cannot with precision analyze
their influence. I shall present here only general considerations on
this point, which has been treated sufficiently in my Researches upon
Life; what I shall add now will be but as a supplement to what has been
explained in that work.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account