Rosa Fernando
Med Secoli. 2009;21(3):1137-72.
The inquiry about the causes of the Thebes plague characterizes Sophocles' tragedy Oedipus the King. This inquiry uses a circumstantial method (Ginzburg's "evidential paradigm") which can be compared to Peirce's abduction. The circumstantial knowledge is a proceedment of the hippocratic medicine and Sophocles undoubtedly knew it: it can also be observed in the Mesopotamian proceedments of divination and medicine from which it probably derives through a laicization process. This knowledge is related to the [see text], a type of intelligence which has to do with the development of fluent situations. The characters of Oedipus also shows some aspects of a holy medicine (for example the theme of the enigma and some shamanist aspects) which reappear after the failure of the hippocratic medicine unsuccessfully used by the doctors during the Athens' plague. In this tragedy we can find different types of knowledge: on the one hand a rational knowledge of techniques (which in turn comes from a holy semiotic knowledge) and on the other hand an initiatory knowledge closely linked to the medicine which also includes interpretation.
对底比斯瘟疫起因的探究构成了索福克勒斯的悲剧《俄狄浦斯王》的核心。这种探究采用了一种情境式方法(金兹堡的“证据范式”),它可与皮尔斯的溯因推理相比较。情境知识源自希波克拉底医学,索福克勒斯无疑知晓这一点:在美索不达米亚的占卜和医学进程中也能观察到它,它可能是通过世俗化过程从那里演变而来。这种知识与[见文本]相关,这是一种与流畅情境发展相关的智慧类型。俄狄浦斯的人物形象还展现出神圣医学的一些方面(例如谜语主题和一些萨满教方面),这些在雅典瘟疫期间医生们未能成功运用的希波克拉底医学失败之后再度出现。在这部悲剧中,我们能发现不同类型的知识:一方面是关于技术的理性知识(而这又源自神圣的符号知识),另一方面是与医学紧密相连的启蒙知识,其中也包含解读。