Physician and patient : $b or, a practical view of the mutual duties, relations and interests of the medical profession and the communityHooker, Worthington
Science
Physician and patient : $b or, a practical view of the mutual duties, relations and interests of the medical profession and the community
Hooker, Worthington
Medical ethics; Physician and patient; Physicians; Quacks and quackery
thousand ties that bind it to its habitation at the very moment of
its destruction. Were it not for this assurance of our immortality,
we could look forward in the uncertain future to nothing but blank,
drear annihilation, as awaiting our minds, just as it does the minds
of the brutes that perish.
In our carefulness to avoid materialism, we are too apt to look upon
the mind and the body as two separate and independent things. At
death they do indeed become so, but who of us knows that they would,
were it not for the fiat of the Almighty? Who knows that there is not
a necessity for the putting forth of his power in each individual
case at the time of death, to prevent the mind of man from dying
with his body, just as the mind of the brute does with his? The very
prevalent notion that the mind is _essentially_ indestructible,
and that it is put into the body as a separate thing, having the
power _of itself_ to leave the body whenever it dies, rests on no
substantial proof. That it is _destined_ thus to leave the body is
quite another thing.
Materialists, of whom we are pained to say there are many among
believers in phrenology, though they flatly deny it,[39] seem to
think that the brain produces thought pretty much as the liver
makes bile or the stomach gastric juice. This doctrine would be
_gratuitous_, a mere supposition, even if there were no Christian
revelation to contradict it. But while we discard all such
anti-Christian and absurd fantasies, we must not run to the other
extreme, as some good men have done. It must be admitted, that in
this life all the _manifestations_ of mind are not only connected
with, but are _dependent_ upon, a material organization. The nature
of this connection and dependence is of course a mystery, but of its
existence there is no doubt. So far as injury is done to the brain
and nervous system, just so far are the manifestations or actions
of the mind impaired. And, on the other hand, moral causes, acting
_directly_ upon the mind, affect through it the organization. And
when insanity results from moral causes thus acting, it is not a
direct effect, but an _indirect_ one—the organization affected by
the mind is thrown into a diseased state, and reacts upon the mind,
influencing its manifestations. If the mind thus acted upon were
a spirit, separated from the body, the result would be merely the
feelings, which the motives applied would _naturally_ produce, and
not the unnatural feelings of insanity. It is not strictly proper
then to speak of a ‘mind diseased.’
Let me not be understood to mean that mental derangement in every
case is to be attributed to disease that leaves such palpable traces
that the dissecting knife would reveal it if death were to take
place. There are diseased operations in the body, that are hidden
from our view—so hidden, that they not only leave no traces, but
often develop no characteristic bodily symptoms.
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.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account