Joy, would you mind discussing this point a bit further?
You wrote:
build a
*** What needs to be cured? If we ask the client, s/he invariably
cites a physical complaint or whatever it is that s/he finds most
uncomfortable or aesthetically displeasing. Of course, we know that
these manifestations, while relevant, are not at the center of the
destabilization. So, naturally, as homeopaths, our understanding of
what needs to be "cured" is not eczema or fibromyalgia or Addison's,
etc., but rather that which destabilized the living force and caused
it to generate symptoms in its efforts to maintain homeostasis.
Therefore, the ranking of symptoms must carefully take into
consideration those factors that best define the destabilizing
process so as to obliterate it. To do that, homeopaths have devised
all manner of analytical methods and repertorial techniques, some of
which I admire, others that simply baffle me >:~\ Some insist that
mentals are of paramount importance, others reflect that mentals can
be misleading and it's better to emphasize generalities. Some
include locals if they are intense and/or persistent, while others
for the most part ignore them. Some claim that to capture the
topmost layer, one must consider mainly the most recent symptoms,
others suggest that it is those symptoms which are most persistent
or which predominate that take the highest ranking, regardless of
when they appeared. So what is your -- and others -- understanding
and how do you arrange the hierarchy when seeking that which to
prioritize?
Toni