You do not currently have permission to view the full text for this document. Please sign in to an account with an active subscription or contact support.
Hippocrates, the father of medicine, referred to the concept of philanthropia, a word which probably first appeared in the Hippocratic Corpus. The original meaning was “kindliness to the individual patient.” The definition gradually broadened in concept under the influence of Greek philosophers until, in the time of Scribonius and the Stoics, this still, small voice had swelled as if to the mighty roar of an organ and the concept of philanthropia became “the love of man.” It would seem that this still, small voice of the individual became lost when the word took on the new meaning, which is still has today.
It is important not to forget the original meaning of philanthropia—kindliness to the individual patient—because this will impress upon our minds the primacy and the uniqueness of the individual. For in this computerized world, once we lose our identity, we become but a number; numbers are easily manipulated, and much that has been hallowed by tradition, custom, and charity could easily be lost.
The tendency to widen or express our concepts by moving away from the specific and the individual toward what is general represents the direction that science has taken for centuries. This has served to facilitate communication between people and the spread of knowledge, all commensurate with the accelerating population growth. The persistence of this trend has enabled science to perform miracle after miracle. But the price has been high. All these accomplishments came about because science had pursued a one-directional course that all but completely ignored the uniqueness of the individual.
The human equivalent of uniqueness is individuality. Uniqueness is an indisputable biological, material, and observable fact—a phenomenon throughout the animate and most of the inanimate world that reaches its
Delivered March 22, 1978.