Dear Wendy
I disagree with your explanation about these three
different miasms(Psora,Sycosis,Syphilis),because in
studing "chronic disease" of huhnemann we find out
that he believes these three miasems are just
infectious (contagious)chronic disease and natural
disease(just like Scarlet fever but it has acute
nature).
Psora is a chronic miasm that in it's primery state by
it's attendant eruption on the skin can infect living
organism when she/he is contacted with such eruptions
which contain contagious agent,and the same occur in
sycosis(figwart-disease)and syphilis(the venereal
Chancre disease).
Peopel are infected with venereal disease through the
impure coition.
You see,these are merely natural infectious disease
that everyone in every age can be infected with them.
Therefore Sycosis and Syphilis are as "well defined"
disease and specific remedy for sycosis is
Thuj(sometimes alternating with nit-as)and for
syphilisis only Merc.
So i think we must again study Huhnemann's teaching
carefully(Organon,Chronic disease...).It can be more
useful for homeopaths to stuey homeopathy from it's
original source.
Also in study the symptoms of psora which Huhnemann
had been found in his cases(it means these aren't the
only symptoms of psora)we find out that symptoms of
mind are small parts of them.
He also believes the disturbance of the mind and
spirit of all kinds are psoric.
Although i believe we must have an open mind and not
fixed ides about what we have been teaching and except
the lows like simillimum's low something maybe
necessary to be changed according to the modern
knowledge.
Regards
Golzarian,
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Find the one for you at Yahoo! Personals
http://personals.yahoo.com
cause of psora??
-
Soroush Ebrahimi
- Moderator
- Posts: 4510
- Joined: Thu Feb 07, 2002 11:00 pm
Re: cause of psora??
Dear Pary
Do you know any one who has suffered/inherited symptoms sue to the fact that
one of their fore-parents had had scarlet fever?
But one certainly sees the effects of syphilis and gon (also tuberculosis)
many many generations afterwards.
It is often difficult for people to know that their fore-parents had had
Syph or Gon, so they cannot tell you directly. But the sign are so clear to
see.
As an example I know a family with a very interesting symptom on their hands
(I cannot go into details for sake of confidentiality) which I thought
showed the syphilitic trait. One member of this family is an amateur
historian and during a consultation he said that he had found that his great
grand father had had syphilis!!
I rest my case!!
I quite agree with you that we should read thoroughly and UNDERSTAND
thoroughly both the Organon and Chronic diseases. So may be it is Time to
re-read the Chronic Diseases and the Organon.
But have you worked out the time difference between the two?
Regards
Soroush
Do you know any one who has suffered/inherited symptoms sue to the fact that
one of their fore-parents had had scarlet fever?
But one certainly sees the effects of syphilis and gon (also tuberculosis)
many many generations afterwards.
It is often difficult for people to know that their fore-parents had had
Syph or Gon, so they cannot tell you directly. But the sign are so clear to
see.
As an example I know a family with a very interesting symptom on their hands
(I cannot go into details for sake of confidentiality) which I thought
showed the syphilitic trait. One member of this family is an amateur
historian and during a consultation he said that he had found that his great
grand father had had syphilis!!
I rest my case!!
I quite agree with you that we should read thoroughly and UNDERSTAND
thoroughly both the Organon and Chronic diseases. So may be it is Time to
re-read the Chronic Diseases and the Organon.
But have you worked out the time difference between the two?
Regards
Soroush
-
Wendy Howard
- Posts: 181
- Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2001 10:00 pm
Re: cause of psora??
Golzarian wrote:
Sure!! As I said at both the beginning and end of my post, it was purely *my
personal opinion*.
I agree absolutely with everyone who's touched on the importance of staying
grounded in our use of homeopathic principles. Treat the case in front of
you according to the Law of Similars *has* to be the prime directive. Once
we go beyond that, we are in the realms of theory, so miasmatic theory is
already an abstraction, a model which attempts to explain the nature of
chronic disease, rather than a "real" thing. Whether it does so
satisfactorily or not I think is still an open question. Hahnemann
postulated that origin of the miasms was in certain infectious diseases. It
is certainly a *part* of the story, but is it the *whole* story in its
entire extent? I just happen to be one of those who think it's not.
There are many levels on which we can seek an understanding of dis-ease, and
all of us bring to homeopathy our own visions of the nature of life too. All
of life is fundamentally interconnected, so at some level *all*
conceptualisations of the nature of dis-ease have some validity and
relevance.
My personal approach has been a process of synthesis - to study as many
different medical systems as I can in order to find the areas in which they
all agree. I've also spent some time studying epidemics through history and
looking at the correlations between the expression of the dis-ease and the
nature of the particular culture and society they infected. There are some
startling correspondences which make for a fascinating re-view of history.
Not to mention some data that challenges the more rigid conceptualisations
of the miasms.
Of course, trying to find rhyme and reason to it all is ultimately pure ego
conceit. How can a single cell understand the nature of the entire body of
which it is a part? Or, put another way, how can we read the mind of God?
But then, the drive to understand is a fundamental part of the nature of
being human. It seems to me that our seeking to bring to consciousness the
nature of life has some purpose in the grand design - provided we don't
over-reach ourselves and imagine we "know it all", which, unfortunately,
seems to have been an all too common delusion from the time that mankind
first acquired consciousness onward!
As I said, *personal opinion*, not "fact".
Regards
Wendy
Sure!! As I said at both the beginning and end of my post, it was purely *my
personal opinion*.
I agree absolutely with everyone who's touched on the importance of staying
grounded in our use of homeopathic principles. Treat the case in front of
you according to the Law of Similars *has* to be the prime directive. Once
we go beyond that, we are in the realms of theory, so miasmatic theory is
already an abstraction, a model which attempts to explain the nature of
chronic disease, rather than a "real" thing. Whether it does so
satisfactorily or not I think is still an open question. Hahnemann
postulated that origin of the miasms was in certain infectious diseases. It
is certainly a *part* of the story, but is it the *whole* story in its
entire extent? I just happen to be one of those who think it's not.
There are many levels on which we can seek an understanding of dis-ease, and
all of us bring to homeopathy our own visions of the nature of life too. All
of life is fundamentally interconnected, so at some level *all*
conceptualisations of the nature of dis-ease have some validity and
relevance.
My personal approach has been a process of synthesis - to study as many
different medical systems as I can in order to find the areas in which they
all agree. I've also spent some time studying epidemics through history and
looking at the correlations between the expression of the dis-ease and the
nature of the particular culture and society they infected. There are some
startling correspondences which make for a fascinating re-view of history.
Not to mention some data that challenges the more rigid conceptualisations
of the miasms.
Of course, trying to find rhyme and reason to it all is ultimately pure ego
conceit. How can a single cell understand the nature of the entire body of
which it is a part? Or, put another way, how can we read the mind of God?
But then, the drive to understand is a fundamental part of the nature of
being human. It seems to me that our seeking to bring to consciousness the
nature of life has some purpose in the grand design - provided we don't
over-reach ourselves and imagine we "know it all", which, unfortunately,
seems to have been an all too common delusion from the time that mankind
first acquired consciousness onward!
As I said, *personal opinion*, not "fact".
Regards
Wendy
-
pary golzarian
- Posts: 3
- Joined: Wed Oct 10, 2001 10:00 pm
Re: cause of psora??
Dear Wendy
Thanks for your useful respons.I am agree with what
you wrote about mismatic theory.In other hand i think
Homoeopathy is just a medical system not a
philosophical one.I'm not going to say that whole of
huhnemman's doctorin is "fact",on the contrary we
should to revise it.
It isn't acceptable for me that only these three
miasms:Psora(itch disease),sycosis(figwart disease)and
syphilis(chancr disease)are the only cause of chronic
diseases that mankind have been suffering from,also if
gon and figwart both have the same fundamental cause
and one miasm.Do you belive that the cause of
Hepatitis is itch infection?
I think we are better use new and different terms for
new and different theory and explanation which differ
with Huhnemman's terminology.
Regards,
Golzarian
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! GeoCities - quick and easy web site hosting, just $8.95/month.
http://geocities.yahoo.com/ps/info1
Thanks for your useful respons.I am agree with what
you wrote about mismatic theory.In other hand i think
Homoeopathy is just a medical system not a
philosophical one.I'm not going to say that whole of
huhnemman's doctorin is "fact",on the contrary we
should to revise it.
It isn't acceptable for me that only these three
miasms:Psora(itch disease),sycosis(figwart disease)and
syphilis(chancr disease)are the only cause of chronic
diseases that mankind have been suffering from,also if
gon and figwart both have the same fundamental cause
and one miasm.Do you belive that the cause of
Hepatitis is itch infection?
I think we are better use new and different terms for
new and different theory and explanation which differ
with Huhnemman's terminology.
Regards,
Golzarian
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! GeoCities - quick and easy web site hosting, just $8.95/month.
http://geocities.yahoo.com/ps/info1
-
Tanya Marquette
- Posts: 5602
- Joined: Tue Oct 30, 2001 11:00 pm
Re: cause of psora??
Dear Golzarian,
Although this discussion has focused on Hahnemanian writing, my training has taught me to think of other miasmatic layers. Acute, tubercular, and carcinosin. This opens up the field of thought and accomodates the historical changes that our world has gone through since Hahneman.
tanya
Although this discussion has focused on Hahnemanian writing, my training has taught me to think of other miasmatic layers. Acute, tubercular, and carcinosin. This opens up the field of thought and accomodates the historical changes that our world has gone through since Hahneman.
tanya
-
Farbod Rahnama
- Posts: 58
- Joined: Wed Apr 01, 2020 10:00 pm
Re: cause of psora??
Dear Tanya
1_You can find acute miasm in HN's writings.
2_In our time miasm has not a distinct definition. HN in his own time was studying on disease knowledge. Because he beleived that art of cure is based on 3 knowledge(aphorism 3 & 71): knowledge of disease, knowledge of remedies, knowing how to match these remedies to patients.
If we study organon we can find a lot on knoledge of disease. He categorized diseases with different categorizations. For example acute diseases and chronic ones, or infectious disease and nonifectious ones.
He named infectious disease: MIASM.
So you can name any infectious disease, a miasm. If phtysis is a distinct infectious disease with distinct pathogenesis you can name it tubercular miasm.
Kind Regards
Farbod
From: tanya marquette
Dear Golzarian,
Although this discussion has focused on Hahnemanian writing, my training has taught me to think of other miasmatic layers. Acute, tubercular, and carcinosin. This opens up the field of thought and accomodates the historical changes that our world has gone through since Hahneman.
tanya
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
1_You can find acute miasm in HN's writings.
2_In our time miasm has not a distinct definition. HN in his own time was studying on disease knowledge. Because he beleived that art of cure is based on 3 knowledge(aphorism 3 & 71): knowledge of disease, knowledge of remedies, knowing how to match these remedies to patients.
If we study organon we can find a lot on knoledge of disease. He categorized diseases with different categorizations. For example acute diseases and chronic ones, or infectious disease and nonifectious ones.
He named infectious disease: MIASM.
So you can name any infectious disease, a miasm. If phtysis is a distinct infectious disease with distinct pathogenesis you can name it tubercular miasm.
Kind Regards
Farbod
From: tanya marquette
Dear Golzarian,
Although this discussion has focused on Hahnemanian writing, my training has taught me to think of other miasmatic layers. Acute, tubercular, and carcinosin. This opens up the field of thought and accomodates the historical changes that our world has gone through since Hahneman.
tanya
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]