280 MODEKN MYSTICISM AND MODERN SCIENCE. 



cannot be forthcoming. * Nevertheless, partly on the faith of 

 evidence of this sort, and partly on the faith of anterior con- 

 viction in the minds of others, people in all ages and in all 

 countries have adopted the wildest medical mysticisms, dig- 

 nifying these with the names of 6 systems ' and ( sciences,' 

 designations to which they can lay no claim. 



Next to the fear of being deceived by the latent dishonesty 

 of judgment from which not even the strongest, the best- 

 regulated, and most highly-cultured minds are exempt there 

 is no source of error more necessary to be guarded against 

 than the paralysing influence of great names. It has been 

 stated in respect to authors, that so soon as a writer has made 

 for himself a name, it matters little what he may write ; the 

 public will feign merit, even if there be none. Most apoph- 

 thegms are exaggerations. The above is confessedly exag- 

 gerated ; but it fairly represents a human tendency. It has 

 ever prevailed, and the prevalence of it is nowhere more re- 

 markable or more embarrassing than in the paths of science. 



History teems with the records of truths postponed, and 

 errors disseminated, because of this tendency of the human 

 mind to raise up idols to be worshipped. The Aristotelean 

 philosophy maintained an undisputed sway over the minds of 

 men for more than 1800 years ; and in medicine the writings 

 of Hippocrates and Galen, up to the time of the madman 

 Paracelsus, exercised an authority only second to that of 

 Holy Writ. The world defends its idols as a South -Sea 

 islander defends his wooden deities to the utmost. The 

 Brahmin who dashed to pieces the microscope that showed 

 him the myriads of animals he consumed in his vegetable 

 food, could not be more irate than one who, having set up 

 an idol of belief, witnesses its sudden dethronement by evi- 

 dence adduced. Lest so great a calamity should befall one 

 of its idols, society will resolutely give evidence the cut-direct, 

 as though truth were an evil. To illustrate this position by 

 the much-worn history of Galileo would be trite. Rather let 



