I am not sure that the feeling, of which the doctrine to which I have

referred is the full expression, does not lie at the bottom of the

minds of a great many people who yet would vigorously object to give a

verbal assent to the doctrine itself. However this may be, the main

point is that sufficient knowledge has now been acquired of vital

phenomena, to justify the assertion, that the notion, that there is

anything exceptional about these phenomena, receives not a particle of

support from any known fact. On the contrary, there is a vast and an

increasing mass of evidence that birth and death, health and disease,

are as much parts of the ordinary stream of events as the rising and

setting of the sun, or the changes of the moon; and that the living

body is a mechanism, the proper working of which we term health; its

disturbance, disease; its stoppage, death. The activity of this

mechanism is dependent upon many and complicated conditions, some of

which are hopelessly beyond our control, while others are readily

accessible, and are capable of being indefinitely modified by our own

actions. The business of the hygienist and of the physician is to know

the range of these modifiable conditions, and how to influence them

towards the maintenance of health and the prolongation of life; the

business of the general public is to give an intelligent assent, and a

ready obedience based upon that assent, to the rules laid down for

their guidance by such experts. But an intelligent assent is an assent

based upon knowledge, and the knowledge which is here in question means

an acquaintance with the elements of physiology.

It is not difficult to acquire such knowledge. What is true, to

a certain extent, of all the physical sciences, is eminently

characteristic of physiology--the difficulty of the subject begins

beyond the stage of elementary knowledge, and increases with every

stage of progress. While the most highly trained and the best furnished

intellect may find all its resources insufficient, when it strives to

reach the heights and penetrate into the depths of the problems of

physiology, the elementary and fundamental truths can be made clear to

a child.

No one can have any difficulty in comprehending the mechanism of

circulation or respiration; or the general mode of operation of the

organ of vision; though the unravelling of all the minutiae of these

processes, may, for the present, baffle the conjoined attacks of the

most accomplished physicists, chemists, and mathematicians. To know the

anatomy of the human body, with even an approximation to thoroughness,

is the work of a life; but as much as is needed for a sound

comprehension of elementary physiological truths, may be learned in a

week.

A knowledge of the elements of physiology is not only easy of

acquirement, but it may be made a real and practical acquaintance with

the facts, as far as it goes. The subject of study is always at hand,

in one's self. The principal constituents of the skeleton, and the

changes of form of contracting muscles, may be felt through one's own

skin. The beating of one's heart, and its connection with the pulse,

may be noted; the influence of the valves of one's own veins may be

shown; the movements of respiration may be observed; while the

wonderful phenomena of sensation afford an endless field for curious

and interesting self-study. The prick of a needle will yield, in a drop

of one's own blood, material for microscopic observation of phenomena

which lie at the foundation of all biological conceptions; and a cold,

with its concomitant coughing and sneezing, may prove the sweet uses of

adversity by helping one to a clear conception of what is meant by

"reflex action."

Of course there is a limit to this physiological self-examination. But

there is so close a solidarity between ourselves and our poor relations

of the animal world, that our inaccessible inward parts may be

supplemented by theirs. A comparative anatomist knows that a sheep's

heart and lungs, or eye, must not be confounded with those of a man;

but, so far as the comprehension of the elementary facts of the

physiology of circulation, of respiration, and of vision goes, the one

furnishes the needful anatomical data as well as the other.

Thus, it is quite possible to give instruction in elementary physiology

in such a manner as, not only to confer knowledge, which, for the

reason I have mentioned, is useful in itself; but to serve the purposes

of a training in accurate observation, and in the methods of reasoning

of physical science. But that is an advantage which I mention only

incidentally, as the present Conference does not deal with education in

the ordinary sense of the word.

It will not be suspected that I wish to make physiologists of all the

world. It would be as reasonable to accuse an advocate of the "three

R's" of a desire to make an orator, an author, and a mathematician of

everybody. A stumbling reader, a pot-hook writer, and an arithmetician

who has not got beyond the rule of three, is not a person of brilliant

acquirements; but the difference between such a member of society and

one who can neither read, write, nor cipher is almost inexpressible;

and no one nowadays doubts the value of instruction, even if it goes no

farther.

The saying that a little knowledge is a dangerous thing is, to my mind,

a very dangerous adage. If knowledge is real and genuine, I do not

believe that it is other than a very valuable possession, however

infinitesimal its quantity may be. Indeed, if a little knowledge is

dangerous, where is the man who has so much as to be out of danger?

If William Harvey's life-long labours had revealed to him a tenth part

of that which may be made sound and real knowledge to our boys and

girls, he would not only have been what he was, the greatest

physiologist of his age, but he would have loomed upon the seventeenth

century as a sort of intellectual portent. Our "little knowledge" would

have been to him a great, astounding, unlooked-for vision of scientific

truth.

I really see no harm which can come of giving our children a little

knowledge of physiology. But then, as I have said, the instruction must

be real, based upon observation, eked out by good explanatory diagrams

and models, and conveyed by a teacher whose own knowledge has been

acquired by a study of the facts; and not the mere catechismal

parrot-work which too often usurps the place of elementary teaching.

It is, I hope, unnecessary for me to give a formal contradiction to the

silly fiction, which is assiduously circulated by fanatics who not only

ought to know, but do know, that their assertions are untrue, that I

have advocated the introduction of that experimental discipline which

is absolutely indispensable to the professed physiologist, into

elementary teaching.

But while I should object to any experimentation which can justly be

called painful, for the purpose of elementary instruction; and, while,

as a member of a late Royal Commission, I gladly did my best to prevent

the infliction of needless pain, for any purpose; I think it is my duty

to take this opportunity of expressing my regret at a condition of the

law which permits a boy to troll for pike, or set lines with live frog

bait, for idle amusement; and, at the same time, lays the teacher of

that boy open to the penalty of fine and imprisonment, if he uses the

same animal for the purpose of exhibiting one of the most beautiful and

instructive of physiological spectacles, the circulation in the web of

the foot. No one could undertake to affirm that a frog is not

inconvenienced by being wrapped up in a wet rag, and having his toes

tied out; and it cannot be denied that inconvenience is a sort of pain.

But you must not inflict the least pain on a vertebrated animal for

scientific purposes (though you may do a good deal in that way for gain

or for sport) without due licence of the Secretary of State for the

Home Department, granted under the authority of the Vivisection Act.

So it comes about, that, in this present year of grace 1877, two

persons may be charged with cruelty to animals. One has impaled a frog,

and suffered the creature to writhe about in that condition for hours;

the other has pained the animal no more than one of us would be pained

by tying strings round his fingers, and keeping him in the position of

a hydropathic patient. The first offender says "I did it because I find

fishing very amusing," and the magistrate bids him depart in peace;

nay, probably wishes him good sport. The second pleads, "I wanted to

impress a scientific truth, with a distinctness attainable in no other

way, on the minds of my scholars," and the magistrate fines him five

pounds.

I cannot but think that this is an anomalous and not wholly creditable

state of things.

XII

ON MEDICAL EDUCATION

[1870]

It has given me sincere pleasure to be here today, at the desire of

your highly respected President and the Council of the College. In

looking back upon my own past, I am sorry to say that I have found that

it is a quarter of a century since I took part in those hopes and in

those fears by which you have all recently been agitated, and which now

are at an end. But, although so long a time has elapsed since I was

moved by the same feelings, I beg leave to assure you that my sympathy

with both victors and vanquished remains fresh--so fresh, indeed, that

I could almost try to persuade myself that, after all, it cannot be so

very long ago. My business during the last hour, however, has been to

show that sympathy with one side only, and I assure you I have done my

best to play my part heartily, and to rejoice in the success of those

who have succeeded. Still, I should like to remind you at the end of it

all, that success on an occasion of this kind, valuable and important

as it is, is in reality only putting the foot upon one rung of the

ladder which leads upwards; and that the rung of a ladder was never

meant to rest upon, but only to hold a man's foot long enough to enable

him to put the other somewhat higher. I trust that you will all regard

these successes as simply reminders that your next business is, having

enjoyed the success of the day, no longer to look at that success, but

to look forward to the next difficulty that is to be conquered. And

now, having had so much to say to the successful candidates, you must

forgive me if I add that a sort of under-current of sympathy has been

going on in my mind all the time for those who have not been

successful, for those valiant knights who have been overthrown in your

tourney, and have not made their appearance in public. I trust that, in

accordance with old custom, they, wounded and bleeding, have been

carried off to their tents, to be carefully tended by the fairest of

maidens; and in these days, when the chances are that every one of such

maidens will be a qualified practitioner, I have no doubt that all the

splinters will have been carefully extracted, and that they are now

physically healed. But there may remain some little fragment of moral

or intellectual discouragement, and therefore I will take the liberty

to remark that your chairman to-day, if he occupied his proper place,

would be among them. Your chairman, in virtue of his position, and for

the brief hour that he occupies that position, is a person of

importance; and it may be some consolation to those who have failed if

I say, that the quarter of a century which I have been speaking of,

takes me back to the time when I was up at the University of London, a

candidate for honours in anatomy and physiology, and when I was

exceedingly well beaten by my excellent friend, Dr. Ransom, of

Nottingham. There is a person here who recollects that circumstance

very well. I refer to your venerated teacher and mine, Dr. Sharpey. He

was at that time one of the examiners in anatomy and physiology, and

you may be quite sure that, as he was one of the examiners, there

remained not the smallest doubt in my mind of the propriety of his

judgment, and I accepted my defeat with the most comfortable assurance

that I had thoroughly well earned it. But, gentlemen, the competitor

having been a worthy one, and the examination a fair one, I cannot say

that I found in that circumstance anything very discouraging. I said to

myself, "Never mind; what's the next thing to be done?" And I found

that policy of "never minding" and going on to the next thing to be

done, to be the most important of all policies in the conduct of

practical life. It does not matter how many tumbles you have in this

life, so long as you do not get dirty when you tumble; it is only the

people who have to stop to be washed and made clean, who must

necessarily lose the race. And I can assure you that there is the

greatest practical benefit in making a few failures early in life. You

learn that which is of inestimable importance--that there are a great

many people in the world who are just as clever as you are. You learn

to put your trust, by and by, in an economy and frugality of the

exercise of your powers, both moral and intellectual; and you very soon

find out, if you have not found it out before, that patience and

tenacity of purpose are worth more than twice their weight of

cleverness. In fact, if I were to go on discoursing on this subject, I

should become almost eloquent in praise of non-success; but, lest so

doing should seem, in any way, to wither well-earned laurels, I

will turn from that topic, and ask you to accompany me in some

considerations touching another subject which has a very profound

interest for me, and which I think ought to have an equally profound

interest for you.

I presume that the great majority of those whom I address propose to

devote themselves to the profession of medicine; and I do not doubt,

from the evidences of ability which have been given to-day, that I have

before me a number of men who will rise to eminence in that profession,

and who will exert a great and deserved influence upon its future. That

in which I am interested, and about which I wish to speak, is the

subject of medical education, and I venture to speak about it for the

purpose, if I can, of influencing you, who may have the power of

influencing the medical education of the future. You may ask, by what

authority do I venture, being a person not concerned in the practice of

medicine, to meddle with that subject? I can only tell you it is a

fact, of which a number of you I dare say are aware by experience (and

I trust the experience has no painful associations), that I have been

for a considerable number of years (twelve or thirteen years to the

best of my recollection) one of the examiners in the University of

London. You are further aware that the men who come up to the

University of London are the picked men of the medical schools of

London, and therefore such observations as I may have to make upon the

state of knowledge of these gentlemen, if they be justified, in regard

to any faults I may have to find, cannot be held to indicate defects in

the capacity, or in the power of application of those gentlemen, but

must be laid, more or less, to the account of the prevalent system of

medical education. I will tell you what has struck me--but in speaking

in this frank way, as one always does about the defects of one's

friends, I must beg you to disabuse your minds of the notion that I am

alluding to any particular school, or to any particular college, or to

any particular person; and to believe that if I am silent when I should

be glad to speak with high praise, it is because that praise would come

too close to this locality. What has struck me, then, in this long

experience of the men best instructed in physiology from the medical

schools of London is (with the many and brilliant exceptions to which I

have referred), taking it as a whole, and broadly, the singular

unreality of their knowledge of physiology. Now, I use that word

"unreality" advisedly. I do not say "scanty;" on the contrary, there is

plenty of it--a great deal too much of it--but it is the quality, the

nature of the knowledge, which I quarrel with. I know I used to have--I

don't know whether I have now, but I had once upon a time--a bad

reputation among students for setting up a very high standard of

acquirement, and I dare say you may think that the standard of this old

examiner, who happily is now very nearly an extinct examiner, has been

pitched too high. Nothing of the kind, I assure you. The defects I have

noticed, and the faults I have to find, arise entirely from the

circumstance that my standard is pitched too low. This is no paradox,

gentlemen, but quite simply the fact. The knowledge I have looked for

was a real, precise, thorough, and practical knowledge of fundamentals;

whereas that which the best of the candidates, in a large proportion of

cases, have had to give me was a large, extensive, and inaccurate

knowledge of superstructure; and that is what I mean by saying that my

demands went too low and not too high. What I have had to complain of

is, that a large proportion of the gentlemen who come up for physiology

to the University of London do not know it as they know their anatomy,

and have not been taught it as they have been taught their anatomy.

Now, I should not wonder at all if I heard a great many "No, noes"

here; but I am not talking about University College; as I have told you

before, I am talking about the average education of medical schools.

What I have found, and found so much reason to lament, is, that while

anatomy has been taught as a science ought to be taught, as a matter of

autopsy, and observation, and strict discipline; in a very large number

of cases, physiology has been taught as if it were a mere matter of

books and of hearsay. I declare to you, gentlemen, that I have often

expected to be told, when I have asked a question about the circulation

of the blood, that Professor Breitkopf is of opinion that it

circulates, but that the whole thing is an open question. I assure you

that I am hardly exaggerating the state of mind on matters of

fundamental importance which I have found over and over again to obtain

among gentlemen coming up to that picked examination of the University

of London. Now, I do not think that is a desirable state of things. I

cannot understand why physiology should not be taught--in fact, you

have here abundant evidence that it can be taught--with the same

definiteness and the same precision as anatomy is taught. And you may

depend upon this, that the only physiology which is to be of any good

whatever in medical practice, or in its application to the study of

medicine, is that physiology which a man knows of his own knowledge;

just as the only anatomy which would be of any good to the surgeon is

the anatomy which he knows of his own knowledge. Another peculiarity I

have found in the physiology which has been current, and that is, that

in the minds of a great many gentlemen it has been supplanted by

histology. They have learnt a great deal of histology, and they have

fancied that histology and physiology are the same things. I have asked

for some knowledge of the physics and the mechanics and the chemistry

of the human body, and I have been met by talk about cells. I declare

to you I believe it will take me two years, at least, of absolute rest

from the business of an examiner to hear the word "cell," "germinal

matter," or "carmine," without a sort of inward shudder.

Science & Education: Essays · 第 17 / 25 段