On Apr 9, 2008, at 1:40 AM,
wrote:
Really?
How far would you get without it?
It's an essential aspect of the *average* case.
The definition needs to include the average if nothing else:-)
Which is the great majority of the cases we handle.
Sorry but pretending otherwise makes no sense to me. You want to
invent a definition that covers only rare exceptions to the rule.
That's the opposite of a good definition however theoretically
applicable it might be. And that approach also will lead to ridicule
from outside homeopathy for failing to cover the great majority of
cases. They will want to know why you are sweeping the majority under
the carpet.
If I was a client looking for a homeopath, I'd surely feel that way,
if the definition of the system covered less than a small minority of
cases.
Corner stone yes - not only stone:-)
You are defining homeopathy to a prospective client. It needs to be a
realistic view of what *they* will find when seeing a homeopath.
Talking only about non-potentized remedies is not defining
homeopathy. Homeopathy is MORE than that.
To do less than a decent coverage of what constitutes its practice
per 6th Organon is like defining a river as drops of water.
Technically you can argue it, but it bears no relationship to reality
when one arrives at the Amazon. Likewise leaving out potentized
remedies in the definition of homeopathy, is inappropriate and
implies there are no potentized remedies.
Homeopathy has Amazonian power compared with allopathy - the
definition needs to cover that as well as the fact that the energy is
LIKE that of the individual. Lets not have a "River is drops of
water" type definition - it's WAY to wishy-washy and unrealistic to
depict our very far-reaching profession.
Namaste,
Irene
--
Irene de Villiers, B.Sc AASCA MCSSA D.I.Hom/D.Vet.Hom.
P.O. Box 4703 Spokane WA 99220.
www.angelfire.com/fl/furryboots/clickhere.html (Veterinary Homeopath.)
"Man who say it cannot be done should not interrupt one doing it."
