Comment re: on the myth of the papyrus Edwin Smith: is it magic or science?

Abstract

Dear Editor, Dr. Brawanski’s article in Acta Neurochirurgica is a very thoughtful and broad-spectrum reflection on the Edwin Smith Papyrus and its place in a “unified field theory” of the Egyptian world view. Concerning the article, Dr. Meltzer and I have somewhat different perspectives in some regards. The title of this particular article, we submit, may lead the reader to a misconception. Definitely, the ESP is, on one hand, not a myth, and on the other hand, it does contain both science and magic (ritual power) [1]. We surely agree with Brawanski's final analysis here. By definition, myth is an unfounded or false notion, a popular belief or tradition that has grown up around something. Concerning the ESP and science, the author of the ESP seems to have described conditions for which what might be called a proximate cause in the Aristotelian sense is observable, and these conditions are treated with what we would characterize as a pragmatic methodology. Brawanski considers the ESP scientific, not necessarily according to the “modern” concept, but “respecting the specific principles to define natural events and mechanisms.”We agree, the Trauma Treatise of the ESP is scientific in the sense that it conforms with a system of knowledge covering general truths, with recognition and formulation of specific trauma situations and the collection of data through observation and trial and error. Only by not advancing to the stage of formulation and testing of hypotheses does the clinical methodology used in the ESP fail to fulfill our modern concept of the “scientific method.” We can consider the ESP as a “snapshot” in the transitional stage of development of what would become modern medicine. Concerning the ESP and magic, the existing ESP (ca. 1650-1550 B.C.) is an unfinished copy, probably being made for didactic purposes, or, perhaps, for a physician’s use. The ESP has two sections, Recto and Verso. The Recto is the Trauma Treatise. Suffice it to say that, in our opinion, some of the observations and treatments of the ESP are part of an overall world in which what we call supernatural beings and causes operated. Yet, there is clearly a prevailing distinction among the responses to conditions for which different types of causes are perceived.