a history of science-1-第58章

按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！


inductions　of　science　which　have　chiefly　claimed　our　attention　in　recent　chapters。　The　subject　in　question　is　the　old　familiar　one　of　false　inductions　or　pseudoscience。　In　dealing　with　the　early　development　of　thought　and　with　Oriental　science；　we　had　occasion　to　emphasize　the　fact　that　such　false　inductions　led　everywhere　to　the　prevalence　of　superstition。　In　dealing　with　Greek　science；　we　have　largely　ignored　this　subject；　confining　attention　chiefly　to　the　progressive　phases　of　thought；　but　it　must　not　be　inferred　from　this　that　Greek　science；　with　all　its　secure　inductions；　was　entirely　free　from　superstition。　On　the　contrary；　the　most　casual　acquaintance　with　Greek　literature　would　suffice　to　show　the　incorrectness　of　such　a　supposition。　True；　the　great　thinkers　of　Greece　were　probably　freer　from　this　thraldom。　of　false　inductions　than　any　of　their　predecessors。　Even　at　a　very　early　day　such　men　as　Xenophanes；　Empedocles；　Anaxagoras；　and　Plato　attained　to　a　singularly　rationalistic　conception　of　the　universe。　We　saw　that　〃the　father　of　medicine；〃　Hippocrates；　banished　demonology　and　conceived　disease　as　due　to　natural　causes。　At　a　slightly　later　day　the　sophists　challenged　all　knowledge；　and　Pyrrhonism　became　a　synonym　for　scepticism　in　recognition　of　the　leadership　of　a　master　doubter。　The　entire　school　of　Alexandrians　must　have　been　relatively　free　from　superstition；　else　they　could　not　have　reasoned　with　such　effective　logicality　from　their　observations　of　nature。　It　is　almost　inconceivable　that　men　like　Euclid　and　Archimedes；　and　Aristarchus　and　Eratosthenes；　and　Hipparchus　and　Hero；　could　have　been　the　victims　of　such　illusions　regarding　occult　forces　of　nature　as　were　constantly　postulated　by　Oriental　science。　Herophilus　and　Erasistratus　and　Galen　would　hardly　have　pursued　their　anatomical　studies　with　equanimity　had　they　believed　that　ghostly　apparitions　watched　over　living　and　dead　alike；　and　exercised　at　will　a　malign　influence。　Doubtless　the　Egyptian　of　the　period　considered　the　work；　of　the　Ptolemaic　anatomists　an　unspeakable　profanation；　and；　indeed；　it　was　nothing　less　than　revolutionaryso　revolutionary　that　it　could　not　be　sustained　in　subsequent　generations。　We　have　seen　that　the　great　Galen；　at　Rome；　five　centuries　after　the　time　of　Herophilus；　was　prohibited　from　dissecting　the　human　subject。　The　fact　speaks　volumes　for　the　attitude　of　the　Roman　mind　towards　science。　Vast　audiences　made　up　of　every　stratum　of　society　thronged　the　amphitheatre；　and　watched　exultingly　while　man　slew　his　fellow…man　in　single　or　in　multiple　combat。　Shouts　of　frenzied　joy　burst　from　a　hundred　thousand　throats　when　the　death…stroke　was　given　to　a　new　victim。　The　bodies　of　the　slain；　by　scores；　even　by　hundreds；　were　dragged　ruthlessly　from　the　arena　and　hurled　into　a　ditch　as　contemptuously　as　if　pity　were　yet　unborn　and　human　life　the　merest　bauble。　Yet　the　same　eyes　that　witnessed　these　scenes　with　ecstatic　approval　would　have　been　averted　in　pious　horror　had　an　anatomist　dared　to　approach　one　of　the　mutilated　bodies　with　the　scalpel　of　science。　It　was　sport　to　see　the　blade　of　the　gladiator　enter　the　quivering；　living　flesh　of　his　fellow…gladiator；　it　was　joy　to　see　the　warm　blood　spurt　forth　from　the　writhing　victim　while　he　still　lived；　but　it　were　sacrilegious　to　approach　that　body　with　the　knife　of　the　anatomist；　once　it　had　ceased　to　pulsate　with　life。　Life　itself　was　held　utterly　in　contempt；　but　about　the　realm　of　death　hovered　the　threatening　ghosts　of　superstition。　And　such；　be　it　understood；　was　the　attitude　of　the　Roman　populace　in　the　early　and　the　most　brilliant　epoch　of　the　empire；　before　the　Western　world　came　under　the　influence　of　that　Oriental　philosophy　which　was　presently　to　encompass　it。　In　this　regard　the　Alexandrian　world　was；　as　just　intimated；　far　more　advanced　than　the　Roman；　yet　even　there　we　must　suppose　that　the　leaders　of　thought　were　widely　at　variance　with　the　popular　conceptions。　A　few　illustrations；　drawn　from　Greek　literature　at　various　ages；　will　suggest　the　popular　attitude。　In　the　first　instance；　consider　the　poems　of　Homer　and　of　Hesiod。　For　these　writers；　and　doubtless　for　the　vast　majority　of　their　readers；　not　merely　of　their　own　but　of　many　subsequent　generations；　the　world　is　peopled　with　a　multitude　of　invisible　apparitions；　which；　under　title　of　gods；　are　held　to　dominate　the　affairs　of　man。　It　is　sometimes　difficult　to　discriminate　as　to　where　the　Greek　imagination　drew　the　line　between　fact　and　allegory；　nor　need　we　attempt　to　analyse　the　early　poetic　narratives　to　this　end。　It　will　better　serve　our　present　purpose　to　cite　three　or　four　instances　which　illustrate　the　tangibility　of　beliefs　based　upon　pseudo…scientific　inductions。　Let　us　cite；　for　example；　the　account　which　Herodotus　gives　us　of　the　actions　of　the　Greeks　at　Plataea；　when　their　army　confronted　the　remnant　of　the　army　of　Xerxes；　in　the　year　479　B。C。　Here　we　see　each　side　hesitating　to　attack　the　other；　merely　because　the　oracle　had　declared　that　whichever　side　struck　the　first　blow　would　lose　the　conflict。　Even　after　the　Persian　soldiers；　who　seemingly　were　a　jot　less　superstitious　or　a　shade　more　impatient　than　their　opponents；　had　begun　the　attack；　we　are　told　that　the　Greeks　dared　not　respond　at　first；　though　they　were　falling　before　the　javelins　of　the　enemy；　because；　forsooth；　the　entrails　of　a　fowl　did　not　present　an　auspicious　appearance。　And　these　were　Greeks　of　the　same　generation　with　Empedocles　and　Anaxagoras　and　aeschylus；　of　the　same　epoch　with　Pericles　and　Sophocles　and　Euripides　and　Phidias。　Such　was　the　scientific　status　of　the　average　mindnay；　of　the　best　mindswith　here　and　there　a　rare　exception；　in　the　golden　age　of　Grecian　culture。　Were　we　to　follow　down　the　pages　of　Greek　history；　we　should　but　repeat　the　same　story　over　and　over。　We　should；　for　example；　see　Alexander　the　Great　balked　at　the　banks　of　the　Hyphasis；　and　forced　to　turn　back　because　of　inauspicious　auguries　based　as　before　upon　the　dissection　of　a　fowl。　Alexander　himself；　to　be　sure；　would　have　scorned　the　augury；　had　he　been　the　prey　of　such　petty　superstitions　he　would　never　have　conquered　Asia。　We　know　how　he　compelled　the　oracle　at　Delphi　to　yield　to　his　wishes；　how　he　cut　the　Gordian　knot；　how　he　made　his　dominating　personality　felt　at　the　temple　of　Ammon　in　Egypt。　We　know；　in　a　word；　that　he　yielded　to　superstitions　only　in　so　far　as　they　served　his　purpose。　Left　to　his　own　devices；　he　would　not　have　consulted　an　oracle　at　the　banks　of　the　Hyphasis；　or；　consulting；　would　have　forced　from　the　oracle　a　favorable　answer。　But　his　subordinates　were　mutinous　and　he　had　no　choice。　Suffice　it　for　our　present　purpose　that　the　oracle　was　consulted；　and　that　its　answer　turned　the　conqueror　back。　One　or　two　instances　from　Roman　history　may　complete　the　picture。　Passing　over　all　those　mythical　narratives　which　virtually　constitute　the　early　history　of　Rome；　as　preserved　to　us　by　such　historians　as　Livy　and　Dionysius；　we　find　so　logical　an　historian　as　Tacitus　recording　a　miraculous　achievement　of　Vespasian　without　adverse　comment。　〃During　the　months　when　Vespasian　was　waiting　at　Alexandria　for　the　periodical　season　of　the　summer　winds；　and　a　safe　navigation；　many　miracles　occurred　by　which　the　favor　of　Heaven　and　a　sort　of　bias　in　the　powers　above　towards　Vespasian　were　manifested。〃　Tacitus　then　describes　in　detail　the　cure　of　various　maladies　by　the　emperor；　and　relates　that　the　emperor　on　visiting　a　temple　was　met　there；　in　the　spirit；　by　a　prominent　Egyptian　who　was　proved　to　be　at　the　same　time　some　eighty　miles　distant　from　Alexandria。　It　must　be　admitted　that　Tacitus；　in　relating　that　Vespasian　caused　the　blind　to　see　and　the　lame　to　walk；　qualifies　his　narrative　by　asserting　that　〃persons　who　are　present　attest　the　truth　of　the　transaction　when　there　is　nothing　to　be　gained　by　falsehood。〃　Nor　must　we　overlook　the　fact　that　a　similar　belief　in　the　power　of　royalty　has　persisted　almost　to　our　own　day。　But　no　such　savor　of　scepticism　attaches　to　a　narrative　which　Dion　Cassius　gives　us　of　an　incident　in　the　life　of　Marcus　Aureliusan　incident　that　has　become　famous　as　the　episode　of　The　Thundering　Legion。　Xiphilinus　has　preserved　the　account　o