Re: data base?
Posted: Tue Dec 14, 2004 1:32 am
All this reminds me of what I concluded years ago when these machines, and for that matter these programmes, started pouring in.
My conclusion was and is that there must always be a man / woman behind and before a machine.
A machine can be a mean but can never be an end.
Syed Mohsin Rizvi
http://www.homoeohelpline.netfirms.com
Rosemary C Hyde PhD wrote:
This discussion is reminding me of when I got my first Radar program, after a little over a year of homeopathic training. I was ecstatic, thinking my prescribing would suddenly, miraculously, get much more accurate. I plugged in rubrics for the first case, and the remedies that came up had nothing to do with the patient's illness. It was the most beautiful -- and humbling -- illustration of the GIGO (garbage-in-garbage-out) principle I'd ever seen. So it was back to the books and classes for a few more years!
))
The programs provide a fantastic library of homeopathic writings -- from many more sources than anyone -- well maybe not Julian -- is likely to have on his or her bookshelves. The repertorization part does speed up searches for specific details and is marvelous for seeing the outcome of various combinations of rubrics. But you still need to find the exact description of the symptoms in Materia Medica, and what you put into the repertorization still works better or worse depending on your skill in picking symptoms: central to the case, relatively unusual, and solid, well-developed repertory rubrics.
Often, I find with the Repertory software that less is MUCH more. If I can find two relatively unusual symptoms that are important in a case, and combine them in the software, it gives me a clue for a relatively unknown remedy that can be right on -- where none of the polychrests or well known remedies seems to fit exactly.
Rosemary
My conclusion was and is that there must always be a man / woman behind and before a machine.
A machine can be a mean but can never be an end.
Syed Mohsin Rizvi
http://www.homoeohelpline.netfirms.com
Rosemary C Hyde PhD wrote:
This discussion is reminding me of when I got my first Radar program, after a little over a year of homeopathic training. I was ecstatic, thinking my prescribing would suddenly, miraculously, get much more accurate. I plugged in rubrics for the first case, and the remedies that came up had nothing to do with the patient's illness. It was the most beautiful -- and humbling -- illustration of the GIGO (garbage-in-garbage-out) principle I'd ever seen. So it was back to the books and classes for a few more years!
)) The programs provide a fantastic library of homeopathic writings -- from many more sources than anyone -- well maybe not Julian
-- is likely to have on his or her bookshelves. The repertorization part does speed up searches for specific details and is marvelous for seeing the outcome of various combinations of rubrics. But you still need to find the exact description of the symptoms in Materia Medica, and what you put into the repertorization still works better or worse depending on your skill in picking symptoms: central to the case, relatively unusual, and solid, well-developed repertory rubrics. Often, I find with the Repertory software that less is MUCH more. If I can find two relatively unusual symptoms that are important in a case, and combine them in the software, it gives me a clue for a relatively unknown remedy that can be right on -- where none of the polychrests or well known remedies seems to fit exactly.
Rosemary