威廉·哈维由于建立血液循环理论被看作“现代生理学之父”，然而历史学家从哈维《心血运动论》之外的其他著作中挖掘出了他保守的亚里士多德主义形象，对哈维的革命性提出了质疑。本文试图重建一种修正的革命论，从方法论和身体观两个层面论证哈维的血液循环理论对生命科学的革新。哈维所面对的传统是由盖伦完成的生理学体系，盖伦吸收了亚历山大里亚学派的解剖学成果，将希腊的理性医学重构、丰富为一个以大脑、心脏、肝脏三个部位为中心的、层级复杂的、强目的论的生理学体系。帕多瓦大学的维萨留斯、科伦坡、法布里修斯等人对盖伦体系做出了修正和完善，创立了新的解剖学范式，为哈维的工作奠定了基础。哈维发现血液循环所依赖的关键方法是帕多瓦亚里士多德主义的逻辑学，认为由因导果和由果溯因对于科学而言都是有效且必要的推理方法。因此，哈维强调个人亲身经验的优先性，尤其是解剖技术和“亲眼见证”（autopsia）在经验明证（demonstratio）上的可靠性。哈维对血液循环的论证不是标准意义上的“假说-演绎”法，但是已经开始使用假定性的前提，具有现代科学方法的雏形。哈维通过确立血液的首要性地位，简化了盖伦的生理学体系。在这个过程中，最关键的环节是革新盖伦生理学遗留的精气观念，哈维首先通过心脏的机械化初步否认了动脉血中含有作为气体的精气；并进一步主张血液而非精气才是灵魂的寓所和首要工具。由此，哈维从物理形态上和功能上统一了动脉血和静脉血的本质，这一血液观同时也取消了原生热、原初水分等传统的生理学观念。血液循环理论经过笛卡尔的重构融合进了机械论身体观。十七世纪的牛津生理学家在机械论的框架下继续探究热、呼吸和血液的本质，正式形成了以血液循环为中心的新生理学体系。哈维建立血液循环理论是对生命科学的重要革新，他通过消除作为灵魂首要工具的精气，动摇了传统灵魂观，向一个无灵魂的现代生命观迈出了关键的一步。
William Harvey is universally acknowledged as the founder of modern physiology due to his groundbreaking theory of blood circulation. However, historical analysis of his works beyond De motu cordis has led to the exposure of Harvey‘s conservative Aristotelianism, raising doubts regarding his revolutionary contributions. This paper aims to reestablish the discontinuity and highlight Harvey‘s notable innovation in both methodological approaches and body conception.Harvey confronted the physiological system established by Galen, which integrated the anatomical achievements of the Alexandrian school and restructured the rational medicine of ancient Greece into a hierarchical, teleological physiological system centered around the brain, heart, and liver. Pioneers from the University of Padua, including Vesalius, Colombo, and Fabricius, revised and enhanced Galen‘s system, developing a new paradigm of anatomy that laid the groundwork for Harvey‘s discoveries.Harvey‘s discovery of blood circulation was significantly influenced by Paduan Aristotelianism, which posited that composition and resolution are equally valid and necessary methods for discovery. Harvey emphasized the primacy of personal experience, particularly the reliability of anatomical practices and autopsia in demonstratio. Although Harvey‘s argument for blood circulation did not adhere to a strict Hypothesis-Deduction model, it employed hypothetical premises, thus laying the foundations for the modern scientific method.By asserting the supremacy of blood, Harvey simplified the physiological system. He innovated the key concept of spirit, a remnant of Galen‘s physiology, by negating the concoction of blood and spirit in his explanation of heart mechanics. By emphasizing that blood serves as the instrument of the soul, Harvey further diminished the specific role of spirit. He unified the essence of arterial and venous blood in terms of both material form and function, meanwhile eliminating traditional physiological concepts such as innate heat and primigenial moisture.The circulation theory was successfully integrated into the mechanical view of the body through Cartesian reconstruction. Seventeenth-century Oxford physiologists continued to investigate the nature of heat, respiration, and blood under the philosophical framework of mechanism, eventually establishing a contemporary physiological system centered on blood circulation.In conclusion, Harvey‘s establishment of blood circulation theory represents a monumental innovation in the field of life sciences. By dismissing the spirit as the primary instrument of the soul, he fundamentally challenged traditional notions of the soul and contributed to the development of a modern perspective of life devoid of the concept of the soul.
