The 2 Schools of Thought

Nutrition is an assimilation of that which nourishes to that which receives nourishments.65

To explain it, we must assume a preliminary process of adhesion,66 and for that, again, one of presentation.67

Whenever the nourishing juice is emitted from the vessels, it is first dispersed all through this part. Then it is presented, and next it adheres, and becomes completely assimilated.

The so-called white [leprosy] shows the difference between assimilation and adhesion, in the same way that the kind of dropsy which some people call anasarca clearly distinguishes presentation from adhesion.

The genesis of such a dropsy does not come about as do some of the conditions of atrophy and wasting,68 from an insufficient supply of moisture;

The flesh is obviously moist enough,—in fact it is thoroughly saturated,—and each of the solid parts of the body is in a similar condition.

While, however, the nutriment conveyed to the part does undergo presentation, it is still too watery, and is not properly transformed into a juice,69 nor has it acquired that viscous and agglutinative quality which results from the operation of innate heat;70 therefore, adhesion cannot come about, since, owing to this abundance of thin, crude liquid, the pabulum runs off and easily slips away from the solid parts of the body. In white [leprosy], again, there is adhesion of the nutriment but no real assimilation.

Therefure, in that part which is to be nourished there must first occur presentation, next adhesion, and finally assimilation proper.

Nutriment is that which is actually nourishing.

• The quasi-nutriment which is not yet nourishing (e.g. matter which is undergoing adhesion or presentation) is not nutriment.

That which is still contained in the veins, and still more, that which is in the stomach, from the fact that it is destined to nourish if properly elaborated, has been called “nutriment.”

Similarly we call the various kinds of food “nutriment,” not because they are already nourishing the animal, nor because they exist in the same state as the material which actually is nourishing it, but because they are able and destined to nourish it if they be properly elaborated.

This was also what Hippocrates said, viz., “Nutriment is what is engaged in nourishing, as also is quasi-nutriment, and what is destined to be nutriment.” For to that which is already being assimilated he gave the name of nutriment; to the similar material which is being presented or becoming adherent, the name of quasi-nutriment; and to everything else—that is, contained in the stomach and veins—the name of destined nutriment.

Chapter 12

Nutrition must necessarily be a process of assimilation of that which is nourishing to that which is being nourished.

Some people think that Nature:

• is not artistic
• does not show forethought for the animal’s welfare
• has absolutely no native powers to alter some substances, attract others, and discharge others.

Such people say that this assimilation does not occur in reality, but is merely apparent.

There are generally 2 sects in medicine and philosophy.

1. One class supposes that all substance which is subject to genesis and destruction is at once continuous72 and susceptible of alteration.

Hippocrates took this road.

2. The other school assumes substance to be unchangeable, unalterable, and sub-divided into fine particles, which are separated from one another by empty spaces.

The second school says that there is no substance or faculty peculiar to Nature or to Soul.73

• Instead, these result from how the primary corpuscles,74 which are unaffected by change, come together.

The first school, on the other hand, believes that Nature is not posterior to the corpuscles, but is a long way prior to them and older than they. Therefore, they think that it is Nature which puts together the bodies both of plants and animals.

She does this by her faculties such as:

• attractive and assimilative of what is appropriate
• expulsive of what is foreign.

She skilfully:

• moulds everything during the stage of genesis.
• provides for the creatures after birth

Here she employs other faculties such as:

• affection and forethought for offspring
• sociability and friendship for kindred.

The second school believes that:

• none of these things exist in the natures75 [of living things]
• the soul has no original innate idea for this, whether of agreement or difference, of separation or synthesis, of justice or injustice, of the beautiful or ugly

All such things arise in us from sensation and through sensation. Animals are steered by certain images and memories.

Some of these people have even expressly declared that the soul possesses no reasoning faculty, but that we are led like cattle by the impression of our senses, and are unable to refuse or dissent from anything.

In their view, obviously, courage, wisdom, temperance, and self-control are all mere nonsense.

• We do not love either each other or our offspring, nor do the gods care anything for us.

This school also despises dreams, birds, omens, and the whole of astrology, subjects that I have dealt at greater length in another work76 where I discuss the views of Asclepiades the physician.77

Those who wish to do so may familiarize themselves with these arguments, and they may also consider at this point which of the two roads lying before us is the better one to take.

According to this teaching, substance is one and is subject to alteration.

There is a consensus in the movements of air and fluid throughout the whole body;78

Nature acts throughout in an artistic and equitable manner, having certain faculties, by virtue of which each part of the body draws to itself the juice which is proper to it, and, having done so, attaches it to every portion of itself, and completely assimilates it; while such part of the juice as has not been mastered,79 and is not capable of undergoing complete alteration and being assimilated to the part which is being nourished, is got rid of by yet another (an expulsive) faculty.