Practical medicine and medical diagnosis / by Byrom Bramwell.

  • Bramwell, Byrom, Sir, 1847-1931.
Date:
1887
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: Practical medicine and medical diagnosis / by Byrom Bramwell. 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.

    54/164 (page 46)
    mdanclwlic tem'pc.rament]\Ir Hutcliiiisoii defines ‘ tlie term tempera- ment as applicable to the sum of the physical peculiarities of an in- dividual, exclusive of all definite tendencies to disease.’ ‘ Difl'erent temperaments,’ he says, ‘ are to be assumed to give some degree of peculiarity to morlud processes, when such have been induced by other causes, but they do not in themselves involve any special proclivity. When most strongly marked, temperament is still consistent with tlie enjoyment of perfect health.’- Mr Hutchinson doubts whether, in a large majority of cases, there do really exist in persons as yet in perfect health, any peculiarities by which \ve can predicate or discriminate tlie ‘ fundamental mode of vital activity;’ in other words, the temjnrament, as Laycock defined it, of the individual. ‘Whosoever,’ lie says, ‘will set himself the task of attempting to classify a given number of indi- viduals according to their temperaments will, I think, soon find himself baffled. He will discover that he is mistaking for criteria of tempera- ment conditions which are simply indicative of youth or age, of health or disease, or the effects of past anxiety or trouble, or of comparative immunity from them. Just as the physiognomist ought carefully to exclude from his estimate of the original and inborn character of a man those traits of expression which have come to him through the wear and tear of life, and keep closely to the original features, so should the student of temperament scrupulously reject all that has been superadded, and which is in a sense accidental. Temperament, as I have endeavoured to define it, concerns the original inherited organisation of the individual, and does not include anything which is the result of the influences to which his life has exposed him. That which has accrued to him during life goes to produce or aggravate diathesis, but can do nothing in modification of temperament,^ . . . He will find, moreover, unless I am much mistaken, that if he attempts to go beyond mere complexion, there are not more than two or three in the dozen whom he can with any degi’ee of confidence assign to special temperaments. As to complexion itself, the further he goes the more he will have to confess that, putting various conditions of sanguification aside as being in many persons dependent upon varying states of health, he can after all classify the complexions themselves only in reference to pigmentation. The varying degrees of dark, fair, or red constitute almost the sole individual peculiarities of the com- plexion which are not altered by disease or diet. But while IMr Hutchinson doubts our ability to distinguish the ‘ I (juote from Mr Jonatlian Hutchinson, wliosc masterly lectures on The I’etligree of Hisease, I would strongly advise all my readers to peruse for themselves.