The new medicine and the old ethics

medicine more meritorious, but may account for some otherwise surprising lapses. For example he sees Erasistratos as a stepping stone in a harmonious tradition from Hippocrates to Galen, not as the founder of a theory that Galen constantly attacked. This is a view that could hardly be taken by anyone who had read much Galen for himself. Another stumbling point is the theory of vision. He has strange remarks on "eye-spirit" and he omits some of the more ingenious ancient arguments for sight being an active process. In fact the "old medicine" (as William Harvey called it) is often more plausible than the book makes out. Hoeniger describes what people used to think very well, but is less successful at explaining why they thought it and why they were content with their orthodoxies. One final criticism. The modern authorities cited on ancient medicine are often out of date and many eminent living scholars are not referred to at all. Consequently some matters are dealt with inadequately. Furthermore the book's value for reference puposes is reduced. This is a pity. Nevertheless, Hoeniger's is the most comprehensive and generally useful book that exists on the subject, and for this he deserves congratulations, not complaints. Jonsen's title is inspired by Sir William Osler's 1919 lecture to the British Classical Association, 'The old humanities and the new science'. Osler championed the new medical sciences in a curriculum dominated by traditional humanities, Jonsen's 1988 Harvard Medical School Gay lectures champion the humanities (history and philosophy of medicine, medical ethics) in a medical curriculum dominated by science. The title also encapsulates Jonsen's central theme: that new medical technology exacerbates pre-existing tensions in five "old" medical ethics: a Hippocratic ethic of beneficence, a Samaritan ethic of charity, a Lockean ethic of property right, a Percivalean ethic of noblesse oblige, and a Cabotean ethic of competence. Jonsen calls his approach to history aggadah: "a magical rabbinic mode of thought in which myth, theology, poetry, and superstition robustly mingle" (p. 4). A description with deeper historiographic roots would be "monumentalist". The coinage is Nietzsche's and characterizes historians, like Jonsen, who believe that "History ... gives moral meaning to the past; [and] moral confidence in the future.. ." (p. 157). Some might blanche at finding meaning in history; not Nietzsche-who disdained "scientific" history as a degenerate form of "critical" history and extolled monumentalism. Jonsen's lectures are a testament to the …