Hidden in Plain Sight: The Moral Imperatives of Hippocrates’ First Aphorism

Abstract

This historiographic survey of extant English translations and interpretations of the renowned Hippocratic first aphorism has demonstrated a concerning acceptance and application of ancient deontological principles that have been used to justify a practice of medicine that has been both paternalistic and heteronomous. Such principles reflect an enduring Hippocratism that has perpetuated an insufficient appreciation of the moral nature of the aphorism's second sentence in the practice of the art of medicine. That oversight has been constrained by a philological discourse that has centred on the meanings of the aphorism's first sentence, while little consideration has been given to the more important ethical consideration within the second sentence's imperatives.

When I use a word . . . . Medical aphorisms

“…The earliest medical aphorisms are attributable to Hippocrates, 400 of them. The most famous is the first in the series3:…”

Goodbye Hippocrates?

“…The idea that this apparently time-honoured practice should summarize and guide the ethics of medical practice in the twenty-first century is fanciful, and few medical schools now have such a ceremony, requirement, or rite of passage at graduation that includes such an oath. Fiddes and Komesaroff (2021) analyse the first aphorism and trace its textual history. While life may be short and the art long, these authors conclude that the second part of this famous passage that requires the patient to effectively do what he or she is told by the doctor, should be scrapped as paternalistic and out of touch with today's world and community expectations.…”