We shall so far conclude these observations on the chimera of astrology
and medicine with the following remarks in the words of Chamber against
Knight's work,[79] which defends this fanciful science, if science it may
be called. "It demonstrates nothing while it defends every thing. It
confutes, according to Knight's own ideas: it alleges a few scattered
facts in favour of astrological productions, which may be picked up in
that immensity of fabling which disgraces history. He strenuously
denies, or ridicules, what the greatest writers have said of this
fanciful art, while he lays great stress on some passages from obscure
authors, or what is worse, from authors of no authority."--The most
pleasant part, however, is at the close where he defends the art from
the objections of Mr. Chamber by recrimination. Chamber had enriched
himself by medical practice, and when he charges the astrologers by
merely aiming to gain a few beggarly pence, Sir Christopher catches
fire, and shews by his quotations, that if we are to despise an art by
its professors attempting to subsist, or for the objections which may be
raised against its vital principles, we ought by this argument most
heartily to despise the medical science, and medical men; he gives all
here he can collect against physic and physicians, and from the
confessions of Galen and Hippocrates, Avicenna and Agrippa, medicine is
made to appear a vainer science than even astrology itself.
Pages:
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184