Reply to Dr. McGilchrist's "Remarks" on Professor Bennett's introductory lecture, "The present state of the theory and practice of medicine" / by John Glen.
- Glen, John, M.A.
- Date:
- 1856
Licence: Public Domain Mark
Credit: Reply to Dr. McGilchrist's "Remarks" on Professor Bennett's introductory lecture, "The present state of the theory and practice of medicine" / by John Glen. Source: Wellcome Collection.
Provider: This material has been provided by The University of Glasgow Library. The original may be consulted at The University of Glasgow Library.
6/32 page 4
![to novel modern theories [p. 21], and also so acute an ana- lyzer as to be scarcely able to peruse a modern medical work, that professes to deal with principles, without encounter- ing a lamentable logical confusion [p. 4]. In regard to these two pamphlets, I may first express my general opinion. The lecture of Dr Bennett appears singularly pleasing, from its hearty and hopeful tone, from the prominence of distinct idea?, the clear method by which each idea is in due succession de- veloped, and the elegance of the illustrations no less correct in themselves than adapted to the audience before whom they were delivered. In the criticism of Dr M'Gilchrist will be found a painful contx'ast. It is disagreeable to the unbiassed from the unhealthiness of its tone, which betrays captious irri- tability against an individual professor, groundless despondency in regard to the advance of medical science, and undue depre- ciation of the advantages of Theory. It is disagreeable to the logician from the absence of prominent points and orderly arrangement; from the frequency with which premises are assumed, which Dr Bennett might reasonably dispute, and the manifest inconsequence between premises thus or otherwise assumed, and the conclusion deduced. To one who has care- fully perused Dr Bennett's lecture it is disagreeable, from its misrepresentation of his views, incompetence to understand his arguments, and interpolation of fond theories. For those (find they are many), who have a respect for the author's talent and literary attainments, it is disagreeable to observe how he fails in redeeming his promise ' to indicate some of the specious fiillacies, barren speculations, and ignes fatui of modern medicine.' Such fjillacies and speculations do exist, and Dr M'Gilchrist would have benefited both Theory and Practice by distinct enumeration and exposure of some of them ; but in coming to Dr Bennett's lecture, in search for them, he has been misguided by some will o the wisp. Such is my present judgment, and the justice of it will. T](https://iiif.wellcomecollection.org/image/b21478168_0006.jp2/full/800%2C/0/default.jpg)
