18
Greek, as such, to every physician; Professor Donaldson would have them all study Music; Dr Balfour, Botany; Dr Gregory, Chemistry. Dr Bennett, then, might profess these branches, and many more, which I need not particularize, and if he did not find himself sufficiently occupied with their profession, his alternative commission, Physiology, might be shown, without much appeal to Greek, to be equivalent in meaning to Natural Philosophy or Natural History, either or both of which he might accordingly begin to teach. The distinguished Professor of Natural Philosophy would, of course, be entitled to make a corresponding translation of the name of his branch of knowledge, and teach Physiology if he willed, although in truth. Natural Philosophy, i.e., the Philosophy of Nature, might, without any stretching, amply cover the whole circle of the sciences, and entitle Professor Forbes to discuss, in his own admirable way, every one of them if he pleased. The same mutatis mutandis may be said of Natural History, and similar remarks might be made on other Chairs; but I will name no more, because, in truth, there is not a single professor in any Faculty of this University, who has not a very wide and liberal commission. Nor is it so only nominally. Every professor in the Faculty of Medicine is continually discussing, to a greater or less extent, the subjects specially taught from all the other Medical Chairs. Anatomy, Chemistry, Physiology, Pathology, are more or less expounded by them all. The Professors of Chemistry and Natural Philosophy must largely consider the same phenomena and laws. Light, Heat, Electricity, Magnetism, Actinism, are included within the domain otherwise peculiar to each; and it must be left greatly to the judgment of each professor, and to mutual arrangement among them all, to determine how much or how little of these common subjects any one will appropriate. It is notorious, accordingly, that whenever a Chair in this or any other University changes its possessor, the subject taught is changed, as well as the style of teaching it. It is not possible, nor is it desirable, that it should be otherwise. Apart from the peculiarities which each man's individuality must impress upon his teaching, as upon everything else which he does, and the immense changes which every year induces in nearly all the branches of human knowledge, we continually forget that, in reality, as there is but one God, the Author of all, so there is but one Science, the expression of His power. What we call sciences are but angular fragments struck from the sphere of Omniscience, to which fresh chips from time to time are added.
