Ezrokhi Dmitry, Lewis Orly
Department of Classical Studies, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem, Israel.
Apeiron. 2025 Feb 19;58(2):109-133. doi: 10.1515/apeiron-2024-0077. eCollection 2025 Apr.
This paper examines Galen's insistence that the stomach and heart, despite their anatomical and physiological similarities to muscles, are not muscles. Through analyzing key passages in Galen's works, we show that this claim is rooted in a consistent tripartite distinction between organs: Psychic Moving Organs (muscles), Natural Moving Organs (e.g. stomach, heart), and Natural Immobile Organs (e.g. liver, kidneys). We argue that this classification is grounded in anatomical differences between flesh and fiber that Galen deems salient enough to support further physiological explanations and corroborate his philosophical-psychological commitments. By tracing the empirical foundations and theoretical motivations for these distinctions, we shed light on the relationship between Galen's anatomical practices and his physiology and psychology.
本文考察了盖伦的观点，即胃和心脏尽管在解剖学和生理学上与肌肉相似，但它们并非肌肉。通过分析盖伦著作中的关键段落，我们表明这一观点源于他对器官一贯的三重区分：精神运动器官（肌肉）、自然运动器官（如胃、心脏）和自然静止器官（如肝脏、肾脏）。我们认为这种分类基于盖伦所认为的肉与纤维之间显著的解剖学差异，足以支持进一步的生理学解释并证实他在哲学心理学方面的观点。通过追溯这些区分的经验基础和理论动机，我们揭示了盖伦的解剖学实践与他的生理学和心理学之间的关系。
