Outline of the Organon

[Soroush Ebrahimi]

You are absolutely correct dear Sheri.
I wish people would read Organon 6 and understand it before trying something ‘new’ on a whim.

I would be surprised if Hn had not tried that idea and rejected it following experiments.

Rgds

Soroush
From: minutus@yahoogroups.com [mailto:minutus@yahoogroups.com]
Sent: Monday, March 27, 2017 11:09 AM
To: minutus@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Minutus] Outline of the Organon
but he didn't go backward to 4th edition dry

Sheri

At 02:12 AM 3/27/2017, you wrote:
Sheri Nakken, former R.N., MA, Hahnemannian Homeopath
http://homeopathycures.wordpress.com/ & http://vaccinationdangers.wordpress.com/
ONLINE/Email classes in Homeopathy; Vaccine Dangers; Childhood Diseases

[Sheri Nakken]

that's always the excuse and it comes from those who don't know the 5th and 6th edition of using Cs and LMs in water in a special way - it isn't just about diluting them, but a special way of administering and monitoring. But I rarely found anyone interested at all. For me, it has made all the difference.

You don't leave something it works - ie dry 4th edition - he left it for a reason, and so did I
Sheri

At 04:28 PM 3/27/2017, you wrote:
Sheri Nakken, former R.N., MA, Hahnemannian Homeopath
http://homeopathycures.wordpress.com/ & http://vaccinationdangers.wordpress.com/
ONLINE/Email classes in Homeopathy; Vaccine Dangers; Childhood Diseases

[pb000014]

That's the thing. Often someone will try to justify some version of practice, be it combo remedies or some new idea alien to homeopathic principles, by saying "hahnemann changed his mind all the time. He kept rewriting the Organon" etc.

What they fail to acknowledge, is it was the "medicine of experience". Each edition was produced when he felt that he had a better, more refined method of practice. But all the way we are sure of two things :-

1. The Principle of homeopathy, similius cur simillibus - runs from start to finish. The understanding of viral force and how it behaves in a healthy state versus how it functions in a disease state, as well as the effect of stronger similar and dissimilar influences on it, these are established in each of the later editions (I do not have access to ed 3 and before).

2. The main reason for recording his ongoing progress was to present the results of his ongoing experimentation to "cause the least possible harm to the vital force".
That's an aphorism which he felt was so important that it he put it at the beginning, basically saying "I'm going to show you the principles - do so in the least harmful way".
So the main difference in ed 4, 5 and 6 is in the method of dosing, ie posology. The 6th edition was his least harmful method of healing, using the 50 millesimal dose.

Personally I feel if there was a 7th edition, it would have been an extension of this, perhaps a better method of applying the dilutions or perhaps even a newer potency scale, but...
ONLY AFTER DILIGENT AND EXHAUSTIVE EXPERIMENTATION. We sometimes forget the time frame between "the medicine of experience" and ed 6.

Of course there are many cases successfully cured using dry dose, but the newer dosing methods offer refined ways to treat especially the very sensitive or weakened patient.

Regards,
Paul
Sent from my Samsung device

[Dr. Joe Rozencwajg, NMD]

Indeed, I fully agree, but that does not mean we should stop experimenting and exploring. Hahnemann clearly showed us throughout his life that nothing was written in stone...as you wrote, he was not "changing his mind", he was finding problems, obstacles, and did his best to understand them and overcome them.

When he said "Imitate me, but imitate me well", I understand that as "keep exploring and refining as I did", not as a recommendation to freeze in time and just aping him...I do not think he would have liked that....

Joe.
Dr. J. Rozencwajg, NMD.

"The greatest enemy of any science is a closed mind"

www.naturamedica.co.nz

[Shannon Nelson]

For those who like to *limit* their tool chest, exclusionary thinking makes sense.
For those who want to *expand* it, sometimes “and” is a better word than “or”.

Who knows what Hahnemann might have done, had he been, let’s say, a busy parent with good skills, straightforward needs, a not-excessively debilitated family, and limited resources?

Personally, I would not want to be permanently *limited* to 4th ed methods, but neither would I be interested in giving it up.

[Shannon Nelson]

There is NO tool suited to every circumstance, and that does include LMs.
So let’s ignore the fact that it’s been so serviceable for so many of us; presumably we’d have been at least equally helped by LMs, so never mind that.

But tell me how I would have given LMs to my cows? (What I usually did, was dissolve, success, and sprinkle it over a bucket of hay, or some treat. Okay that’s not “dry”, but it was otherwise 4th ed.)

And I’ve talked in the past about the friend who simply refuses to attempt anything involving water doses, because head injuries at that time made it an overwhelming task for her — but low potency (and sometimes high) dry Cs were fine. I think that at one point, someone’s (maybe yours, I’m not sure) suggestion for the “what should I do”, was to simply not treat her, unless she was willing to do what I said. Errrrr no……..

And, every “lay prescriber” book that I’m familiar with is written for 4th ed practice, and has a really good track record in helping people deal with simple acutes and injuries. Would you toss out all of that too?

[Sheri Nakken]

the usual excuses - you don't treat all your "cows" with the same remedy and can easily do one cow with LMs or Cs in water directly to the cow
And there will always be someone won't or can't do it, but that doesn't mean it isn't better
You always give me the same excuses.
Sheri

At 11:05 PM 3/27/2017, you wrote:
Sheri Nakken, former R.N., MA, Hahnemannian Homeopath
http://homeopathycures.wordpress.com/ & http://vaccinationdangers.wordpress.com/
ONLINE/Email classes in Homeopathy; Vaccine Dangers; Childhood Diseases

[Sheri Nakken]

and you, Joe, have gone on to develop something further, you haven't gone backwards
Sheri

At 10:09 PM 3/27/2017, you wrote:
Sheri Nakken, former R.N., MA, Hahnemannian Homeopath
http://homeopathycures.wordpress.com/ & http://vaccinationdangers.wordpress.com/
ONLINE/Email classes in Homeopathy; Vaccine Dangers; Childhood Diseases

[Sheri Nakken]

I guess you don't still see the reason Hahnemann gave it up
Sheri

At 10:55 PM 3/27/2017, you wrote:
Sheri Nakken, former R.N., MA, Hahnemannian Homeopath
http://homeopathycures.wordpress.com/ & http://vaccinationdangers.wordpress.com/
ONLINE/Email classes in Homeopathy; Vaccine Dangers; Childhood Diseases

[pb000014]

Thats the point I was making. The differences between the Organons is largely around potency and usage. A refinement of the treatment of the mis-tuned vital force. That is the road Joe has gone. A new potency scale.

What we don't see in the revised Organon's is a deviation from the homeopathic principle of similars or a change in the mechanism of action . That's where I have a problem, when I hear someone trying to justify a non-homeopathic approach by (mis)quoting the Organon or, even worse, claiming "this is new research and hahnemann was over 200 years ago and he kept changing his mind and...." you know the story.

Regards,
Paul

Sent from my Samsung device