Experimental Medicine
Bernard starts by comparing an organic being and an inorganic being. For him, both beings share the same principles and it is morally correct to experiment with both of them. He states that both beings are determined psycho-chemically.
While experimenting with both of them, he says we have to take into account the influence of the environment. In the organic beings both the internal and external environment is taken into account, while in an inorganic being the only influence is the external environment. This states that it is more complex to study an organic body and that they are less dependent to the external environment. On the other hand, inorganic bodies depend entirely on the external environment.
Bernard says that experimentation strives to study the physiology, i.e. the material conditions of phenomena; he does not take into account any spiritual matter. For he says that finding the “why” is useless because after all we can only get to the “how”. Stating the “why” is very complex and beyond our human capacity.
“…The object of science is everywhere the same: to learn the material conditions of phenomena.”
He states that both organic and inorganic bodies are determined by material and psychochemical reactions. In other words, organic beings don’t have a say on what they do or who they are, they are as inorganic bodies. So, it is morally correct to experiment with them. Both beings are dependent on physiology.
“Determinism thus becomes the foundation of all scientific progress and criticism.”
I am a human being; therefore I am an organic being. However, I don’t think that we are determined and don’t have a choice or input in anything we do. I think that we have the capacity to choose what to do, independent from our physiology. I know that we have certain instinct drives, however we have something more powerful that dominates them: reason. With that only weapon, we can choose over things, we are capable of decision making and controlling our physiology.
While experimenting with both of them, he says we have to take into account the influence of the environment. In the organic beings both the internal and external environment is taken into account, while in an inorganic being the only influence is the external environment. This states that it is more complex to study an organic body and that they are less dependent to the external environment. On the other hand, inorganic bodies depend entirely on the external environment.
Bernard says that experimentation strives to study the physiology, i.e. the material conditions of phenomena; he does not take into account any spiritual matter. For he says that finding the “why” is useless because after all we can only get to the “how”. Stating the “why” is very complex and beyond our human capacity.
“…The object of science is everywhere the same: to learn the material conditions of phenomena.”
He states that both organic and inorganic bodies are determined by material and psychochemical reactions. In other words, organic beings don’t have a say on what they do or who they are, they are as inorganic bodies. So, it is morally correct to experiment with them. Both beings are dependent on physiology.
“Determinism thus becomes the foundation of all scientific progress and criticism.”
I am a human being; therefore I am an organic being. However, I don’t think that we are determined and don’t have a choice or input in anything we do. I think that we have the capacity to choose what to do, independent from our physiology. I know that we have certain instinct drives, however we have something more powerful that dominates them: reason. With that only weapon, we can choose over things, we are capable of decision making and controlling our physiology.