Thursday, August 10, 2017

The Medical Background of Aristotle's Philosophy II: Logos


Let us explicate the concept of “λογος”, a notion whose importance cannot be overestimated.  Logos can mean word, story, account or proportion, depending on the context.  Everything produced by art or nature exists in virtue of some logos or proportion (analogia) of opposites.[1]  “Logos belongs to, and is identified with, ousia (beingness), to ti ein einai (“that which it was meant to be” or “what it means to be that thing”) eidos [“form” in Plato’s sense], or phusis as the object of definition of a thing.”[2]  “The ‘good’ of each compound lies in the logos among its opposing constituents.” (Parts of Animals, 639b12-21, p. 995)  “It is according to the state of its composition as determined by logos that a thing is well or ill disposed.”[3]  It is worth reading Joachim’s excellent summary of Generation and Corruption (333b16-20):

The ‘formula expressing the essential nature’ of an omoiomeres (a composite, e. g. a hand) is the logos tes mixews of its constituents, i. e., the scheme of proportions constituting the plan of the combination.  This ‘combining formula’ adequately expresses the ‘form’ (eidos) and is therefore the scientific definition of the omoiomeres, and also states the normal or perfect development of its phusis in the sense of to telos tes geneseos i. e. its ‘good’.[4]  Still, the phusis, eidos and essence (ousia) of the animal as a whole is primary and this whole determines (is the arche of) the proportion of elements in the formation of its individual parts. [5]

In other words, logos is the principle of both a) the correct function and structure of composite parts and b) the possibility of recognizing and naming a kind of animal; it governs the particular composition of the whole animal body[6] and therefore grounds both the physical condition and the empirical identifiability of the animal.  And corresponding to the different formulae for combination of elements, each animal will enjoy health in a different way; eels are at their best when moist, and scorpions when dry.

In the Topics, we find again that health is determined by its inherence in heat or coolness, wetness and dryness.[7]  This is in the Physics too (210a20 p. 62), where health is said to be “in” the hot and cold, a habit (exis) that results from balance; these relations are not identical to, but causal in relation to health. (Topics, 145b7ff. p. 245)  Any sort of excellence requires a state of symmetry[8]; the key to logos in its sense of a formula for binding elements into functional wholes is balance.  Health is a state of symmetry in and stability in which appropriate responses to changing qualitative conditions occur, and disease is the failure to maintain balance (A. Po., 78b18-20 p. 128); in sickness, too much or too little of a quality afflicts the body: “Hot, cold, moist, and dry elements are in constant contact with their opposites in the animal body”, which must resist being broken down and dissolved into those elements. (On the Soul, 407b33-408a26 pp. 25-6)  “The maintenance of the body requires that the active powers (dunamei) temper each other in proportion (analogon) and dominate the passive so that coction (pepsis) and blend (mixeis) can take place.” (Tracy, p. 168)  Blending and mixing occur when the dunamei of two elements are approximately equal.[9]  These elemental qualities, “if equally balanced, will form a third substance when brought to the mean”. (Gen & Corr., 334b23-6, p. 547)  The result is “a new substance which combines the qualities of the two” (Tracy, p. 175), such as bone.  Logos in this context is the principle of both of rightly functioning homeomerous substances (like bone or blood) and of definition, for each kind of natural being is an instance of a specific formula for blending, a desperate and temporary binding of volatile elements into a recognizable creature.

Medicine is wrapped up with another level of logos, too: it is inherently discursive, or language dependent.  The body is like language in an essential way, for it is composed of elements:

An element means the first inherent compound out of which a thing is constructed and which cannot be analyzed formally into a different kind (eidos); for example, the elements of speech are the parts of speech of which speech consists and into which it is ultimately divided, whereas they cannot they cannot in turn be divided into forms of speech different from them in kind...a part of a syllable is not a syllable.” (Metaphysics 1014a25-8, pp. 90-1)

Rhetoric and medicine are sciences which use knowledge of the proper combination of elements into “higher” complex wholes for specific ends, persuasion and health, respectively.  An element that is impossible to reduce into simpler forms is a true element, but the word “element” (stoikeion) also has the looser sense of the materiel or hylic term in a hylomorphic definition. (Metaphysics, 1015a7 pp. 92-3)  For example, an argument may be analyzed as a complex of elements, like a series of metaphors, which in turn would be composed of “elementary” resemblances and symbols, and so on.  By continuing the analysis, we would reach a level at which meaning disappears into elementary syllables[11]  Such syllables cease to resemble language, for they carry no meaning apart from their participation at a higher level of organization.  That is exactly the same relation which the organism has to the materiel elements (earth, air, fire, water) which compose it.

Medicine works with a language already spoken by nature, composed of the articulations and pains of the body; “To the exhaustive presence of the disease in its symptoms corresponds the unobstructed transparency of the pathological being with the syntax of a descriptive language: a fundamental isomorphism of the structure of the disease and of the verbal form which circumscribes it.”[12]  In medicine, logos, as the form and fulfillment of the intellective soul, gathers its own condition of possibility into itself: φυσις.  By the doctor’s intelligence, sickness is made into a language, transformed into a system of meaningful signs-that is, symptoms-and thereby made to disclose and defeat itself.  As the techne which stands between language and phusis, medicine contains elements of both; it investigates the body’s qualities as signs, but aims at exactly the same telos (goal or end) as the living creature it was meant to save.  Through medicine this mixed half living-half speaking creature, the human, struggles against imbalance and dissolution.  All animals strive for life, but it can be said in this case that language itself struggles to maintain itself in existence; the doctor (unless a veterinarian) is caring for a being whose essence is to be language-using.

But, why the need for medicine at all, an art which runs parallel to and supplements phusis?  Why is life necessarily in mortal danger?  Because living things are profoundly delicate; sickness and decay are easy, health and integrity difficult.  At this point, we approach a deep paradox: in Aristotle’s thought, life is contrary to nature.  There is a split in phusis between the elements and life.  From the viewpoint of elementary matter, tecne and phusis are equally unnatural, equally a wrenching interruption of the natural tendency of matter to stay in it’s appropriate place (topos) (fire, for example belongs up, and earth belongs down).  If we unlock the etymology of the word “perverse” (diastrophein), it translates into “turning against,” exactly descriptive of the relation which the elemental and the biological realms bear to each other.  Matter, from the point of view of the creature, exerts a passive potency (or dunamis), a resistance to remaining in the creature’s form.  The passive dunamis of matter appears as the principle of decay.  Decay is a result of the natural movement of elements to their original place (topos), a unique location in the world determined by the qualitative state specific to the element.  The telos of a living thing is to maintain the mixture which is its very substance, the telos of the element is to make it back to the special location proper to it, and one cannot have it both ways; the double telos is tension itself, the tension of powerful dunamei which are in opposition.

In the language of modern physics, organic matter is the outrageous reversal of the third law of thermo-dynamics, entropy.  As time passes, systems generally fall apart, decay, and become less complex.  The exception to that law is the organic world, where (at least during generation and growth) systems grow in complexity and become more organized with the passage of time-the only example of such an exception.  Life in that sense is a rebellion against matter, against time; the organic is the insanity, the dream of matter, inherently quixotic, essentially perilous, ultimately futile, even pitiful, but finally heroic.  It is  unparalleled in all of the vast, silent void in its delicacy and complexity.

So far, it has become clear that medical knowledge operates between the visible, specific patient and the intelligible formulae for combination which underlie health and sickness.  Medicine seeks to produce health, a state which is intimately tied to phusis, and at the same time accessible to the mind, rather than the senses.  It is an art which lies at the intersection of language and “nature”: medicine is language turned back on itself, a techne which uses a discursive knowledge of nature to bring about what phusis cannot always achieve itself, health.  Medicine is the human logos harnessed by the natural imperative to survive, a response to fundamental terror; it is the cry of human life, the reasoning power of the doctor struggling to defend fellow rational beings from the dynamism of the matter in which they are grounded.

References
[1]. Aristotle, Sense and Sensibilia 436a20 J. I. Bearne, trans. p. 693; see also Posterior Analytics 72a1-6, pp. 115-6 in The Complete Works of Aristotle , vol. I Jonathan Barnes, ed. Princeton, 1984 pp. 14-5 (references from the biological works and the Organon are drawn from this volume) and Metaphysics 1029b ff. Richard Hope, trans. Columbia, 1952 p. 134
[2]. Aristotle Parva Natura (On Youth and Old Age) 480b20-30, p. 763
[3]. George A. Kennedy, introduction to the Rhetoric, Oxford, 1991 p. 6
[4]. Allan Gotthelf and James G. Lennox (contributing eds.) Philosophical Issues in Aristotle’s Biology Cambridge, 1987 p. 5
[5]. Aristotle, Categories 8b27-9a4 J. L. Ackrill, trans. pp. 14-5
[6]. Aristotle, Metaphysics 1022b1-2, p. 113
[7]. Aristotle, Parva Natura (On Youth, Old Age, Life and Death, and Respiration) 479a8-9 G. R. T. Ross, trans. p. 760
[8]. Aristotle, Parts of Animals 639b17 A. L. Peck, trans. Harvard, pubs. (Loeb) 1945 p. 57
[9]. Aristotle, Metaphysics 1037b29-1038a35 p. 157 and Posterior Analytics 97a29 Barnes, trans. p. 161

No comments:

Post a Comment

Nietzsche and the Alt-Right 3: Elisabeth Förster-Nietzsche and the Origins of Misreading

The Nazi appropriation of Nietzsche begins with Elisabeth Förster-Nietzsche, the phi l osopher’s sister, who took contro l of her broth...