PART 15
I cannot think in what manner they who advance this doctrine, and
transfer Art from the cause I have described to hypothesis, will cure
men according to the principle which they have laid down. For, as
far as I know, neither the hot nor the
[p. 11]cold, nor the dry, nor the
moist, has ever been found unmixed with any other quality; but I suppose
they use the same articles of meat and drink as all we other men do.
But to this substance they give the attribute of being hot, to that
cold, to that dry, and to that moist. Since it would be absurd to
advise the patient to take something hot, for he would straightway
ask what it is? so that he must either play the fool, or have recourse
to some one of the well known substances; and if this hot thing happen
to be sour, and that hot thing insipid, and this hot thing has the
power of raising a disturbance in the body (and there are many other
kinds of heat, possessing many opposite powers), he will be obliged
to administer some one of them, either the hot and the sour, or the
hot and the insipid, or that which, at the same time, is cold and
sour (for there is such a substance), or the cold and the insipid.
For, as I think, the very opposite effects will result from either
of these, not only in man, but also in a bladder, a vessel of wood,
and in many other things possessed of far less sensibility than man;
for it is not the heat which is possessed of great efficacy, but the
sour and the insipid, and other qualities as described by me, both
in man and out of man, and that whether eaten or drunk, rubbed in
externally, and otherwise applied.