[p. xxxiii]
4. Plato's References to Hippocrates
In the Protagoras (311 B) Plato assumes the case
of a young man who goes to Ἱπποκράτη τὸν Κῷον, τὸν
τῶν Ἀσκληπιαδῶν, to learn medicine. This passage
tells us little except that Hippocrates took pupils
for a fee. But in the Phaedrus (270 C--E) there is
another passage which professes to set forth the
true Hippocratic method. It is as follows :--
Socrates. Do you think
it possible, then, satisfactorily
to comprehend
the nature of soul apart
from the nature of the
universe? |
ΣΩ. Ψυχῆς2 οὐν φύς1ιν
ἀξίως2 λόγου κατανοῆσαι οἴει
δυνατὸν εἶναι ἄνευ τῆς2 τοῦ
ὅλου φύς1εωσ2; |
Phaedrus. Nay, if we
are to believe Hippocrates,
of the Asclepiad
family, we cannot learn
even about the body
unless we follow this
method of procedure. |
ΦΑΙ. Εἰ μὲν οὖν Ἱπποκράτει
γε τῷ τῶν Ἀσκληπιαδῶν
δεῖ τι πείθεσθαι, οὐδὲ
περὶ σώματοσ2 ἄνευ τῆς2 μεθόδου
ταύτης2. |
Socrates. Yes, my friend,
and he is right. Yet
besides the doctrine of
Hippocrates, we must
examine our argument
and see if it harmonizes
with it. |
ΣΩ. Καλῶς2 γάρ, ὦ ἑταῖρε,
λἐγει. χρὴ μέντοι πρὸς2 τῷ
Ἱπποκράτει τὸν λόγον ἐξετάζοντα
σκοπεῖν εἰ συμφωνεῖ. |
Phaedrus. Yes. |
ΦΑΙ. Φημί. |
Socrates. Observe,
then, what it is that both
Hippocrates and correct
argument mean by an
examination of nature.
Surely it is in the following
way that we must inquire
into the nature of
anything. In the first
place we must see whether
that, in which we shall
wish to be craftsmen and
to be able to make others
so, is simple or complex.
In the next place, if it
be simple, we must inquire
what power nature
has given it of acting,
and of acting upon what ;
what power of being
acted upon, and by what.
If on the other hand it
be complex, we must
enumerate its parts, and
note in the case of each
what we noted in the
case of the simple thing,
through what natural
power it acts, and upon
what, or through what
it is acted upon, and by
what. |
ΣΩ. Τὸ τοίνυν περὶ
φύς1εωσ2 σκόπει τί ποτε
λέγει Ἱπποκράτης2 τε καὶ ὁ
ἀληθὴς2 λόγος2. ἆρ' οὐχ
ὧδε δεῖ διανοεῖσθαι περὶ
ὁτουοῦν φύς1εωσ2; πρῶτον
μέν, ἁπλοῦν ἢ πολυειδές2
ἐς1τιν, οὗ πέρι βουλησόμεθα
εἶναι αὐτοὶ τεχνικοὶ καὶ
ἄλλον δυνατοὶ ποιεῖν, ἔπειτα
δέ, ἐὰν μὲν ἁπλοῦν ᾖ,
σκοπεῖν τὴν δύναμιν αὐτοῦ,
τίνα πρὸς2 τί πέφυκεν εἰς2 τὸ
δρᾶν ἔχον ἢ τίνα εἰς2 τὸ παθεῖν
ὑπὸ τοῦ; ἐὰν δὲ πλείω
εἴδη ἔχῃ, ταῦτα ἀριθμησάμενον,
ὅπερ ἐφ' ἑνός2, τοῦτ'
ἰδεῖν ἐφ̓ ἑκάς1του, τῷ τί
ποιεῖν αὐτὸ πέφυκεν ἢ τῷ
τί παθεῖν ὑπὸ τοῦ;--Phaedrus
270 C, D. |
It is obvious that if we could find passages in the
Hippocratic collection which clearly maintain the
doctrine propounded in this part of the Phaedrus we
should be able to say with confidence that the
|