As far as discussing it here, tho--from Ardavan's guidelines it's fine to discuss here (so long as it's in a general context of the classical framework; at least that's how I understood his explanation). If it rouses too much unpleasantness from other listmembers, tho, there are certainly other places where it *can* be discussed without fear of flames, including the three other lists I've mentioned--Homeolist, BeyondHomeopathy, and HomeopathyOpen. No doubt there are others, but those are the ones I know. Maybe the best would be simply to ask whether there are current list members who object to it being discussed here, or whether their objection is rather just that they don't want it to be called "homeopathy"? I *think* that has been the main issue, not so much about whether it's discussed at all. ?
Just FTR, the Periodic Table of the Elements was *not* developed through intuition! It was developed when ... er, "the guy" began mapping out certain properties of the known elements--atomic weight; density; ... I forget what else, and I think atomic number didn't come until later? And noticed there are regular patterns. On the basis of the observed patterns, predictions were made about elements that might be found to fill the un-filled spaces, and those predictions turned out to be really quite accurate--exactly analogous to the process Jan Scholten has used, which is apparently similarly successful. So--not intuition, but first observation, then making and testing of theories!!! Entirely scientific.
Shannon

