A manual of medical diagnosis / by A.W. Barclay.

  • Andrew Whyte Barclay
Date:
1857
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: A manual of medical diagnosis / by A.W. Barclay. Source: Wellcome Collection.

Provider: This material has been provided by Royal College of Physicians, London. The original may be consulted at Royal College of Physicians, London.

    32/642 (page 8)
    opeo-andi of tlie change; hut, assuming these principles as true, our especial work is to learn to grouji symp- toms togethei', and to analyse them separately in such a manner that we may be able to apply to them a scheme already supplied to our hand, which shall in some way account for their existence. It is by the nature of this assumption that rational medicine is distinguished from empiricism. The latter equally seeks to group symptoms together, and to assign to each group the most suitable remedies ; but the theory or scheme Avhich it furnishes is not based on scientific principles. In the application of the theory to the case under observation, the two are exactly analogous. A comparison is to be instituted between the probable results of the supposed malady and tho.se presented by the particular case, and their correspondence serves for the verification of the hypothesis. In short, it is the deductive ])rocess of reasoning applied to the eluci- dation of morbid phenomena. We gather together in the best manner Ave can the fragmentary evidence of symptoms, and Ave apply to it the knoAvn laAvs of cau- sation taught bj'- the theory of disease. The correctness AvitliAvhich this process is pei-formed depends on a variety of circumstances. In the first ]Alace, it Avill be greatly influenced by the amount of evidence. This evidence has to be sought, and there- fore much will depend on the manner in Avhich the investigation is conducted. Without method, some portion of it is sure to be overlooked or forgotten ; Avith a bad method, the information presents itself in such a form as makes the inference of truth a matter of difficulty. The plan adojited in this volume is one which, on close consideration of the subject, has most commended itself to my oavu mind ; but each person Avill probably be di.sposed to modify it so as to suit his OAvn habits of thought. In the second place, the correctness of the conclu- sion must A^ery greatly dejiend on our assigning the true A’alue to each portion of the eA'idence, especially