What dispute over the origin or nature of remedies?

[John Harvey]

Dear Soroush,
If you mean that what you dispute is the origin or nature of remedies, there was no need to dispute it, as it was not in contention. The subject was not remedies. The subject was the use, at any one time, of more than one single, simple medicinal substance in a homoeopathic prescription. Pretty simple, really. Pretty hard to get around, except by changing the subject to an undefined, essentially meaningless subject, such as the creation of a "single remedy", which is also, as it happens, irrelevant to homoeopathy, which, if we understand it in Hahnemann's terms, involves the use -- potentised or unpotentised -- of exactly one single, simple medicinal substance.
But you know all this. It's up to you to produce some kind of argument to back your contention and its relevance to the aphorism. Without that, it remains unfortunately an empty, irrelevant contention about a meaningless term, and ultimately serves only as a useless distraction from discussion of homoeopathy.
Kind regards,
John
2009/7/28 >