[H] Remedy Families

[homeopathy-bounces@homeolist.com]

Hi Peter, Luise,

Thanks for the grammatical clarification. I've been thinking about this over
the last few days and I can see that Hahnemann is referring to the
*conditions* that differentiate the acute miasms that cause a local (common)
gonorrhoea from other internal conditions (signs and symptoms of secondary
gonorrhoea, allopathic supression, additional psoric and syphilitic
complexes) that require anti-sycotic treatment as part of the curative
process.

On reading the entire essay in Chronic Diseases I'm left with an
appreciation of why the English translator used the word 'constitution' to
embody Hahnemann's intent in this context. Please note, I am not personally
referring to any particular neo-Kentian model of 'constitution'.

It appears to me that Hahnemann deliberately used various words and terms
throughout his writings to describe the dynamic interplay between bodily
constitution, innate temperament, individual susceptibility, Vital Force,
infectious contagion and their sequalae and their treatment by homeopathic
medicines.

Indeed, one word seems inadequate to fulfil that role and would
unnecessarily lead us into a kind of literal absolutism.

Luise's original request to show where Hahnemann wrote about :
The nature of the remedy, and
The nature of the constitution,
therefore, for me, can be found everywhere throughout his writings.

"Nevertheless the incredible variety among patients as to their
irritability, their age, their spiritual and bodily development, their vital
power and especially as to the nature of their disease, necessitates a great
variety in their treatment, and also in the administration to them of the
doses of medicines. For their diseases may be of various kinds: either a
natural and simple one but lately arisen, or it may be a natural and simple
one but an old case, or it may be a complicated one (a combination of
several miasmata), or again what is the most frequent and worst case, it may
have been spoiled by a perverse medical treatment, and loaded down with
medicinal diseases." Chronic Diseases p155 B.Jain edition.

Regards,
Chris

[Chris_Gillen]

Hi Peter, Luise,

Thanks for the grammatical clarification. I've been thinking about this over
the last few days and I can see that Hahnemann is referring to the
*conditions* that differentiate the acute miasms that cause a local (common)
gonorrhoea from other internal conditions (signs and symptoms of secondary
gonorrhoea, allopathic supression, additional psoric and syphilitic
complexes) that require anti-sycotic treatment as part of the curative
process.

On reading the entire essay in Chronic Diseases I'm left with an
appreciation of why the English translator used the word 'constitution' to
embody Hahnemann's intent in this context. Please note, I am not personally
referring to any particular neo-Kentian model of 'constitution'.

It appears to me that Hahnemann deliberately used various words and terms
throughout his writings to describe the dynamic interplay between bodily
constitution, innate temperament, individual susceptibility, Vital Force,
infectious contagion and their sequalae and their treatment by homeopathic
medicines.

Indeed, one word seems inadequate to fulfil that role and would
unnecessarily lead us into a kind of literal absolutism.

Luise's original request to show where Hahnemann wrote about :
The nature of the remedy, and
The nature of the constitution,
therefore, for me, can be found everywhere throughout his writings.

"Nevertheless the incredible variety among patients as to their
irritability, their age, their spiritual and bodily development, their vital
power and especially as to the nature of their disease, necessitates a great
variety in their treatment, and also in the administration to them of the
doses of medicines. For their diseases may be of various kinds: either a
natural and simple one but lately arisen, or it may be a natural and simple
one but an old case, or it may be a complicated one (a combination of
several miasmata), or again what is the most frequent and worst case, it may
have been spoiled by a perverse medical treatment, and loaded down with
medicinal diseases." Chronic Diseases p155 B.Jain edition.

Regards,
Chris

[Dave Hartley]

>Luise's original request to show where Hahnemann wrote about :

Yes. Understanding comes from studying in context & applying/testing,
re-reading, refining understanding. Those who operate in this way seem
to come to feel humble at the depth of insight in Hahnemann's writings;
OTOH, there are those who seem to have failed to understand -in context-
and have failed to successfully apply & test
-a subset of this group seems determined to translate Hahnemann into
their own context, which seems unfortunate indeed.

By a strange twist of fate, it would seem that German homeopaths may
have sold Hahnemann quite short.. and might have a great deal to learn
from British & Indian homeopathy, as well as that of the Americas.
(hmm.. who am I leaving out
OTOH, there are some German homeopaths who seem to fully grok
http://w3.one.net/~wap/wapGrok.html
Hahnemann, in theory and practice, and who have also explored at some
depth.. Hahnemann's casebooks... finding coherency & meaning throughout.

I believe it wise in homeopathy to "imitate success" -failure is also a
great teacher, but maybe not a good revolutionary leader
Dave Hartley
www.localcomputermart.com/dave
San Francisco, CA (831)464-8127