Hostname: page-component-5c6d5d7d68-wpx84 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-08-16T22:17:46.194Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Galen Explains the Elephant

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2020

R. J. Hankinson*
Affiliation:
McGill University, Montreal, PQ, Canada, H3A 2T7

Extract

Q: What did the elephant say to the naked man?

A: It looks O.K., but can you breathe through it?

Let me begin by justifying that joke for those of you didn’t find it funny. The relationship between the morphology of the physical organs and their activities has long been a vexed issue in the philosophy of biology: the question of whether structure determines function is of course of contemporary importance in evolutionary theory. That there was a relationship between structure and function was not in general a matter of doubt to the Greek theoretical biologists: but both the extent, and crucially the direction, of the dependence was. And the question need not be restricted to a consideration of the function of a particular part in isolation: when Aristotle takes issue with Anaxagoras for asserting that humans are the most intelligent species because they have hands, claiming rather that they have hands because they are intelligent, he is making a claim not just about the direction of explanation involved, but he is also implicitly at least indicating the scope of such explanations. For Aristotle, intelligence is one of the human functions: and that function necessitates the existence and development of certain organic structures.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © The Authors 1988

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Balme, D., Aristotle's De Partibus Animalium I and De Generatione Animalium I (Oxford 1972)Google Scholar
Barnes, J., et al., eds., Science and Speculation (Cambridge 1982)Google Scholar
Canfield, J.V., ed., Purpose in Nature (Englewood Cliffs 1966)Google Scholar
Duckworth, W.H.L., et al., Galen on Anatomical Procedures: The later Books (Cambridge 1962)Google Scholar
Fortenbaugh, W.et al., eds., Theophrastus of Eresus (New Brunswick 1985)Google Scholar
Frede, M., Galen: Three Treatises on the Nature of Science (Indiana 1985)Google Scholar
Furley, D.J., and Wilkie, J.S., Galen on Respiration and the Arteries (Princeton 1984)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gotthelf, A., ‘Aristotle's Conception of Final Causality,’ Review of Metaphysics 30 (1976)Google Scholar
Hankinson, R.J., ed., Method, Medicine, Metaphysics (supp. vol. to Apeiron: forthcoming, 1988)Google Scholar
Helmreich, G., ed., Galeni de Usu Partium (Leipzig 1907-9) 2 vols.Google Scholar
Hempel, C.G., Aspects of Scientific Explanation (London 1965)Google Scholar
Kühn, G.C., ed., Galeni Opera Omnia (Leipzig 1821-33), 20 vols.Google Scholar
Kuhn, T.S., The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (Chicago, 2nd Edn, 1970)Google Scholar
Kullmann, W., Wissenschaft and Methode (Darmstadt 1974)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lakatos, I., The Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes: Collected Papers Vol. 1 (Cambridge 1975)Google Scholar
Lloyd, G.E.R., Magic, Reason and Experience (Cambridge 1979)Google Scholar
Lloyd, G.E.R., Science, Folklore and Ideology (Cambridge 1983)Google Scholar
Lloyd, G.E.R., ed., Hippocratic Writings (Harmondsworth 1978)Google Scholar
Mackie, J.L., The Cement of the Universe (Oxford 1974)Google Scholar
May, M.T., Galen on the Usefulness of the Parts of the Body (Baltimore 1967), 2 vols.Google Scholar
Nagel, E., The Structure of Science (London 1961)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nutton, V., ed., Galen: Problems and Prospects (London 1981)Google Scholar
Singer, C., Galen on Anatomical Procedures (Oxford 1956)Google Scholar
Sorabji, R.R.K., Necessity, Cause and Blame (London 1980)Google Scholar