The views on the life in the early modern period(the 17th and 18th centuries) with their socio-cultural backgrounds and their meanings at that time were discussed in this paper. Those views discussed here were the dualistic, mechanistic one of Rene Descartes(1596-1650), the animistic, vitalistic one of Georg Ernst Stahl(1660-1734), and the monistic, mechanistic one of Julien Offray de La Mettrie(1709-1751). Author stressed that the processes of their view formation were influenced by the wide range of the various political and religious factors as well as the scientific, medical facts and opinions at that time, and that not only the contents of the views but also their historical contexts should be pursed in the study on the medical thoughts.
English Abstract ; Europe ; History of Medicine, 17th Cent. ; History of Medicine, 18th Cent. ; Philosophy, Medical/*history ; Vitalism/*history

In The Logic of Life (1970), Francois Jacob (1920~ ), Nobel Prize laureate in Physiology or Medicine (1965), proclaimed the end of vitalism based on the concept of life. More than two decades before this capital sentence condemning vitalism was pronounced, Georges Canguilhem (1904~1995), a French philosopher of medicine, already acknowledged that eighteenth-century vitalism was scientifically retrograde and politically reactionary or counter-revolutionary insofar as it was rooted in the animism of Georg Ernst Stahl (1660~1734). The negative preconception of the term 'vitalism' came to be established as an orthodox view, since Claude Bernard (1813~1878) unfairly criticized contemporary vitalism in order to propagate his idea of experimental medicine. An eminent evolutionary biologist like Ernst Mayr (1904~2005) still defended similar views in This is Biology (1997), arguing that if vitalists were decisive and convincing in their rejection of the Cartesian model (negative heuristics), however they were equally indecisive and unconvincing in their own explanatory endeavors (positive heuristics). Historically speaking, vitalists came to the forefront for their outstanding criticism of Cartesian mechanism and physicochemical reductionism, while their innovative concepts and theories were underestimated and received much less attention. Is it true that vitalism was merely a pseudo-science, representing a kind of romanticism or mysticism in biomedical science? Did vitalists lack any positive heuristics in their biomedical research? Above all, what was actually the so.called 'vitalism'? This paper aims to reveal the positive heuristics of vitalism defined by Paul.Joseph Barthez (1734~1806) who was the founder of the vitalist school of Montpellier. To this end, his work and idea are introduced with regard to the vying doctrines in physiology and medicine. At the moment when he taught at the medical school of Montpellier, his colleagues advocated the mechanism of Rene Descartes (1596~1650), the iatromechanism of Herman Boerhaave (1668~1738), the iatrochemistry of Jan Baptist van Helmont (1579~1644), the animism of Stahl, and the organicism of Theophile de Bordeu (1722~1776). On the contrary, Barthez devoted himself to synthesize diverse doctrines and his vitalism consequently illustrated an eclectic character. Always taking a skeptical standpoint regarding the capacity of biomedical science, he defined his famous concept of 'vital principle (principe vital)' as the 'x (unknown variable)' of physiology. He argued that the hypothetical concept of vital principle referred to the 'experimental cause (cause experimentale)' verifiable by positive science. Thus, the vital principle was not presupposed as an a priori regulative principle. It was an a posteriori heuristic principle resulting from several experiments. The 'positivist hypothetism' of Barthez demonstrates not only pragmatism but also positivism in his scientific terminology. Furthermore, Barthez established a guideline for clinical practice according to his own methodological principles. It can be characterized as a 'humanist pragmatism' for the reason that all sort of treatments were permitted as far as they were beneficial to the patient. Theoretical incoherence or incommensurability among different treatments did not matter to Barthez. His practical strategy for clinical medicine consisted of three principles: namely, the natural, analytic, and empirical method. This formulation is indebted to the 'analytic method (methode analytique)' of the French empiricist philosopher Etienne Bonnot de Condillac (1714~1780). In conclusion, the eighteenth.century French vitalism conceived by Barthez pursued pragmatism in general, positivism in methodology, and humanism in clinics.
Biology/history ; Evolution ; History, 18th Century ; History, 19th Century ; History, 20th Century ; Humans ; Male ; Nobel Prize ; Philosophy/history ; Vitalism/*history

This study discusses the historical significance of the Natural Cure Movement of Germany, centering on the Kneipp Cure, a form of hydrotherapy practiced by Father Sebastian Kneipp (1821-1897). The Kneipp Cure rested on five main tenets: hydrotherapy, exercise, nutrition, herbalism, and the balance of mind and body. This study illuminates the reception of the Kneipp Cure in the context of the trilateral relationship among the Kneipp Cure, the Natural Cure Movement in general, and modern medicine. The Natural Cure Movement was ideologically based on naturalism, criticizing industrialization and urbanization. There existed various theories and methods in it, yet they shared holism and vitalism as common factors. The Natural Cure Movement of Germany began in the early 19th century. During the late 19th century and the early 20th century, it became merged in the Lebensreformbewegung (life reform movement) which campaigned for temperance, anti-tobacco, and anti-vaccination. The core of the Natural Cure Movement was to advocate the world view that nature should be respected and to recognize the natural healing powers of sunlight, air, water, etc. Among varied natural therapies, hydrotherapy spread out through the activities of some medical doctors and amateur healers such as Johann Siegmund Hahn and Vincenz Prieβnitz. Later, the supporters of hydrotherapy gathered together under the German Society of Naturopathy. Sebastian Kneipp, one of the forefathers of hydrotherapy, is distinguished from other proponents of natural therapies in two aspects. First, he did not refuse to employ vaccination and medication. Second, he sought to be recognized by the medical world through cooperating with medical doctors who supported his treatment. As a result, the Kneipp cure was able to be gradually accepted into the medical world despite the “quackery” controversy between modern medicine and the Natural Cure Movement. Nowadays, the name of Sebastian Kneipp remains deeply engraved on the memories of German people through various Kneipp spa products, as well as his books such as My Water Cure and Thus Shalt Thou Live! Wörishofen, where Kneipp had served as catholic priest as well as hydrotherapist for 42 years from 1855, changed its name to “Bad Wörishofen” (“Wörishofen Spa” in German). The Kneipp Cure and the Natural Cure Movement became a source of ecologica l thought which is currently gaining more and more sympathy from German people. It is regarded as a lieu de mémoire (site of memory) reflecting the collective identity of German people.
Clergy ; Fathers ; Germany* ; Herbal Medicine ; History, Modern 1601-* ; Humans ; Hydrotherapy ; Naturopathy ; Quackery ; Sunlight ; Temperance ; Urbanization ; Vaccination ; Vitalism ; Water