General reasoning about discontinuity

We have already explained what types of disruption of continuity there are, in the form that needed to be done in a similar place, but now we want to point out some of their qualities, which should become known to us before what we intend to expound.

So, we say that in the treatment of some organs where continuity has been disrupted, we strive to ensure that the continuity becomes again the same as it was - this, for example, applies to meat - while in others we want to maintain contact with the help of some kind of fuse, although continuity and is not restored. This happens, in particular, with bones, except, of course, for bones in children and infants, in which we can sometimes hope for recovery. As for the nerves and vessels, some doctors claim that they do not reconnect, but sometimes there remains contact between them in the form of a bow thanks to the fuse covering and connecting them. Some argue that this does not work on the arteries alone, but Galen disagrees with them and says No, arteries also sometimes grow together - this is confirmed by observation by experience and is logically acceptable. As for observation, Galen saw a fused artery located under the basil, and an artery on the temples and on the legs, and the admissibility of the inference is based on the fact that bone is an extreme in terms of hardness and rarely grows together only in children, and meat is an extreme in softness and always grows together, while veins and arteries are something between bones and meat and their quality should be intermediate. They are less capable of fusion than meat, and are more easily fused than bones; therefore, the vessels grow together when the gap is small and insignificant and the body is naturally moist and soft, and do not grow together under the opposite circumstances. But this is just rhetorical evidence, and one should rely on experience.