Tempering Occult Qualities: Magnetism and Complexio in Early Modern Medical Thought

IF 0.5 2区 哲学 Q3 HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE Early Science and Medicine Pub Date : 2023-11-24 DOI:10.1163/15733823-20230087
Christoph Sander
{"title":"Tempering Occult Qualities: Magnetism and Complexio in Early Modern Medical Thought","authors":"Christoph Sander","doi":"10.1163/15733823-20230087","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In medieval natural philosophy and medicine, magnetic attraction was the most commonly invoked example for the effects of so-called ‘occult qualities’ or ‘occult powers.’ According to this conception – which dates back to Galen, Alexander of Aphrodisias, and Avicenna – magnetism was caused by an insensible quality and not, therefore, by one of the four primary qualities (hot, cold, wet, dry). Already disputed in medieval times, however, was whether the magnet’s ‘temperament’, ‘mixture’ or ‘complexion’ might not account for the attraction of iron. In the early modern period, trained physicians above all increasingly refuted ‘occult qualities’ in magnetism, while at the same time retaining a Galenic framework. They argued instead for more elaborate theories invoking the magnet’s and iron’s ‘complexion’ or their single primary qualities, such as ‘humidity’ or ‘heat.’ Medical concepts were often combined with meteorological ideas for causal theories of natural phenomena like magnetism. By telling this unheard story of ‘complexion’ in theories of magnetism, we show not only how medical theories were transferred from medicine into other fields of research, but also that an established narrative in modern historiography is highly questionable: contrary to what was assumed by the contemporary critics (e.g., Descartes) and many modern historians, several Galenic physicians did not subscribe to a theory of occult qualities (in the case of magnetism) in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries.","PeriodicalId":49081,"journal":{"name":"Early Science and Medicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Early Science and Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/15733823-20230087","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In medieval natural philosophy and medicine, magnetic attraction was the most commonly invoked example for the effects of so-called ‘occult qualities’ or ‘occult powers.’ According to this conception – which dates back to Galen, Alexander of Aphrodisias, and Avicenna – magnetism was caused by an insensible quality and not, therefore, by one of the four primary qualities (hot, cold, wet, dry). Already disputed in medieval times, however, was whether the magnet’s ‘temperament’, ‘mixture’ or ‘complexion’ might not account for the attraction of iron. In the early modern period, trained physicians above all increasingly refuted ‘occult qualities’ in magnetism, while at the same time retaining a Galenic framework. They argued instead for more elaborate theories invoking the magnet’s and iron’s ‘complexion’ or their single primary qualities, such as ‘humidity’ or ‘heat.’ Medical concepts were often combined with meteorological ideas for causal theories of natural phenomena like magnetism. By telling this unheard story of ‘complexion’ in theories of magnetism, we show not only how medical theories were transferred from medicine into other fields of research, but also that an established narrative in modern historiography is highly questionable: contrary to what was assumed by the contemporary critics (e.g., Descartes) and many modern historians, several Galenic physicians did not subscribe to a theory of occult qualities (in the case of magnetism) in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
调和神秘特质:早期现代医学思想中的磁性和复杂性
在中世纪的自然哲学和医学中,磁性吸引是所谓的“神秘品质”或“神秘力量”最常被引用的例子。根据盖伦、阿佛洛狄西亚的亚历山大和阿维森纳的观点,磁性是由一种不可感知的性质引起的,而不是由四种基本性质(热、冷、湿、干)之一引起的。然而,在中世纪已经有争议的是,磁铁的“气质”、“混合物”或“肤色”是否不能解释铁的吸引力。在现代早期,训练有素的医生首先越来越多地驳斥磁学中的“神秘性质”,同时保留盖伦的框架。相反,他们提出了更复杂的理论,援引磁铁和铁的“肤色”或它们单一的主要品质,如“湿度”或“热量”。医学概念经常与气象概念相结合,形成自然现象(如磁力)的因果理论。通过讲述磁性理论中这个闻所未闻的“肤色”故事,我们不仅展示了医学理论是如何从医学转移到其他研究领域的,而且还展示了现代史学中既定的叙述是非常值得怀疑的:与当时的批评家(如笛卡儿)和许多现代历史学家的假设相反,在16世纪和17世纪,一些盖伦学派的医生并不认同神秘性质的理论(以磁力为例)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Early Science and Medicine
Early Science and Medicine HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE-
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
22
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Early Science and Medicine (ESM) is a peer-reviewed international journal dedicated to the history of science, medicine and technology from the earliest times through to the end of the eighteenth century. The need to treat in a single journal all aspects of scientific activity and thought to the eighteenth century is due to two factors: to the continued importance of ancient sources throughout the Middle Ages and the early modern period, and to the comparably low degree of specialization and the high degree of disciplinary interdependence characterizing the period before the professionalization of science.
期刊最新文献
Heart, Center of the World, and the Principle of Motion: from Aristotle to Kepler and Galileo Evidence for Re-attributing to Pierre Gassendi the Authorship of Anatomia ridiculi muris (1651) and Favilla ridiculi muris (1653) Mechanism, vis motiva, and Fermentation: a Reassessment of Borelli’s Physiology Plato’s Dietetics for Intellectuals in Timaeus 86b–90d Between Active Matter and Letters: Kabbalah, Natural Knowledge, and Jewish How-To Books in Early Modern East-Central Europe
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1