Minutus

be present in the human organism at one time >but it say ABSOLUTELY NOTHING
about needing to treat >each disease with a separate remedy.

This is misleading. Aph42 [together with aphs 43-6] explains how in fact Hn
developed the whole similar principle. he observed over a period of time
that people who were already sick might then get another illness. He
observed that sometimes the first illness was annihilated, and that other
times something more deleterious happened - that the first illness was
merely suspended; or that it co-habited with the first illness; or that it
combined with the first to fomr a new disease.

from this he eventually deduced that in the former situation of disease
annihilation the diseases were in some way similar, even if not the same
thing from a purely pathological view.

Thus the homeopathic principle: one similar disease will annihilate another.
and the corollary, that one dissimilar disease will not annihilate another.
it follows, inevitably, that where there are two dissimilar disease states
present simultaneously they will not correspond to the same remedy.

miasms) in the human body needs a different >remedy.
no I didn't. it's not really becoming of you to make false statements in
order to smokescreen this discussion. what I said, quite clearly, was this
was one possibility. There is no need to put disease in quotes. Hn
acknowledged the real existence of diseases. Count how many times the word
appears in the Organon. He is not an idealist philosopher.

possibilities i.e a unified expression of concomitant states >and a
expression of complex chronic miasms. That means my >point has been
acknowledged so I do not need to make any >further posts in this subject.

there are several possibilites:
1. two separate non-miasmatic disease energies requiring two remedies.
2. two separate non-miasmatic disease energies of which one is the
amplification of the constitutional state.
3. two apparently separate disease states which fall into the same miasm.
4. two which belong to two separate miasms, which may be covered by by one
multi-miasmatic remedy.

what you have not acknowledged is point 1. Do you now?
It seems ironic that one of two foundational observations of Hn is now being
rejected as heretical. The VF and diseases are not One.

i repeat your meaningless piece of metaphysical speculation:
vital force

aph 42 shows this is not so. otherwise it could never be that two dissimilar
diseases occupy an organism simultaneously. it is time to admit your
grevious error.

andrew

Dear David,

I would suggest you read through Joy's latest post. Perhaps you then follow
a like manner and communicate in clear and simple, jargon and bombast-free
English? The fact you are either unable or unwilling to suggests your
thinking is either contradictory or you are hiding something.

My point of view [which has been pretty well summarised in Jpoy's post] is
quite simple: Hn says in Aph42 that we can have more than one disease
occurring in a person simultaneously. this could be two acute situations,
two chronic, or one of either. Since this is so, we should not mix symptoms
of one with symptoms of the other.
{The exceptions to this are if one disease has entirely suspended the other,
in which case we have no trouble in eliminating those temporarily-invidsible
symptoms. The other is that they morph into one new disease - such a
direction revealed by the two diseas energies now showing congruity in
modalities etc. }

Do you acknowledge this fairly simple point which Hn states in all plainness
in 42? In answering may I suggest:

1. No quotes of Hn. since the exact meaning of some of these passages is
under dispute, this tends to dsiperse rather than add to clarity. A weak
essay always relies on quotes as if they somehow automatically justify their
viewpoint.

2. No gratuitious aspersions on what i may understand or believe. This does
little to your credibility.

3. not proceeding to contradict yourself in the next paragraph; making
meaningless pseudo-metaphysical non-sequitirs; or trying to eradicate the
point by modifications such as 'often' 'usually' etc. we are not interested
in a statistical analysis.

thanks
andrew
Dear Sir,

In my first post to Minimus on this subject I pointed out that aphorism
40 deals directly with the examples of complex infectious miasms. I also
showed that footnote to 40 discusses the treatment of such conditions. (You
only spoke of aphorism 42). I pointed out that when two acquired infectious
miasms are present Hahnemann suggested the alternation of two specific
anti-miasmatic remedies (not two remedies at the same time i.e. a dual
remedy). The proof is in the Minimus Archive.

I wrote this in my FIRST post on this subject on 6/7/2002:

"In aphorism 40 Hahnemann gives an example were a complex diseases is
caused by acquired chronic miasms i.e actual infectious disorders like
infections caused by psora and active syphilis, etc. These are infectious
miasms in an active acquired state. Hahnemann says in "these kinds of
cases" one may alternate the proper anti-miasmatic remedies at the proper
times."

David Little

That's the facts for all to see. I also pointed out that since
Hahnemann's time we have discovered that some remedies are multi-miasmatic
in nature that can treat more than one miasm at a time. This is something
Hahnemann did not know. I and my colleagues have treated such
multi-miasmatic cases with both methods depending on the symptoms and
circumstances. We have 100s of case histories. Your are merely repeating
what I have already stated very clearly and practiced in the clinic for
many years.

being

You should study your basic homoeopathy and gain some clinical
experience in true vitalism. Disease IS a mistuning of the vital force
(aphorism 11.)

"When a person falls ill, it is initially only this spirit-like,
automatic life force (life principle), everywhere present in the organism
that is mistuned through the dynamics influence of a morbific agent
inimical to life. Only the life principle mistuned to such abnormality can
impart to the organism the adverse sensations and induce in the organism
the irregular functions that we call disease."

What "we call disease" is a mistuning of the vital force. It is "ONLY
the life principle mistuned to such abnormality" that induces the irregular
functions "we call disease". The idea that the VF and diseases are "not
One" is what is heretical. That sounds like the ideas of the mechanist and
allopathic schools.
YES, it is the mistuned vital force of the patient that we call disease
(aphorism 11). The human organism and the vital force are ONE (aphorism
15). This is not my speculation. This is Hahnemann's teachings which you
seem to have misunderstood. It is confirmed in the clinic every time one
takes a case. Has any ever seen a disease walk in a clinic without the
patient? No, they have not because it is impossible.

dissimilar

No sir, Hahnemann says in aphorism 42:

"Because of the dissimilarity of the these maladies to each other, this
can happen WITHOUT DETRIMENT TO THE UNITY OF LIFE". [caps. DL]

Dissimilar diseases exist in the patient without any detriment to the
"UNITY OF LIFE". That unity of the life is represent by the Lebenskraft,
the Vigor Vitae, the life force. It is the vital force which is mistuned by
complex miasms and produces the symptoms "we call disease". The vital force
is the dynamis behind all such phenomena. I have no grievous error to admit
to you. All diseases (including complex disorders) are a mistuning of the
vital force. You have yet to understand the vitalist paradigm and still
think like a mechanist. This error is obvious to all who read the above
passages but you!

Let those who have ears, let them hear.
Sincerely, David Little
---------------
"It is the life-force which cures diseases because a dead man needs no more
medicines."

Samuel Hahnemann

Visit our website on Hahnemannian Homoeopathy and Cyberspace Homoeopathic
Academy at
http://www.simillimum.com
David Little © 2000
ATTENTION PLEASE:

The Minutus Group is established purely for the promotion of Homoeopathy and
educational benefit of its members. It makes no representations regarding
the individual suitability of the information contained in any document read
or advice or recommendation offered which appears on this website and/or
email postings for any purpose. The entire risk arising out of their use
remains with the recipient. In no event shall the minutus site or its
individual members be liable for any direct, consequential, incidental,
special, punitive or other damages whatsoever and howsoever caused.

****
If you do not wish to receive individual emails, send a message with the
subject of 'Digest' to ashahrdar@yahoo.com to receive a single daily digest.

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
minutus-unsubscribe@egroups.com

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

At 08:52 AM 6/17/2002 +1000, you wrote:
You quote the Organon but I should not??? You critique me but should
say nothing about your philosophical view??? Now your accusing me of hiding
something, etc.? I do not except your preconditions on what I might quote
or say nor your personal accusations.

Hahnemann taught the disease IS a mistuning of the vital force. He
also taught that aphorism 42 that similar diseases do not affect the "unity
of life". I also showed that in my first post (6/7/2002) I pointed out
that in aphorism 40 Hahnemann suggested the alternation of remedies in the
case of complex miasms. This has all been documented with quotes and facts.

As you are not willing to acknowledge what I posted about the
alternation of remedies in complex diseases on 6/7/2002 there is no reason
to speak to you. You are arguing with yourself on this point so I do not
need to be involved. As far as what we call disease and the mistunement of
the vital force NOT being one??? Well, that is a mechanistic view that is
not in line with homoeopathic teachings.

David Little
"It is the life-force which cures diseases because a dead man needs no more
medicines."

Samuel Hahnemann

Visit our website on Hahnemannian Homoeopathy and Cyberspace Homoeopathic
Academy at
http://www.simillimum.com
David Little © 2000

not in line with homoeopathic teachings.

What you said so erroneously previously what that the disease and the vital
force represent some kind of [chimeric?] unity, a completely gnostic kind of
notion. This is like saying the crime is identical with the law which
punishes it, and the court which administers the punishment. Now that this
is corrected, you may be able to see that the all-reaching nature of the VF
within the organism in no way prevents it from expressing itself in two or
more distinctive ways.
if there is one legal consitution, does this mean there is only one court to
deliver it? one kind of penalty? one kind of crime?

should we take care not to mix symptoms from one disease energy in a case
with those of another?
what is the totality? is it:
1. the collection of characteristic symptoms the patient suffers from.
2.or, the collection of charcteristic symptoms which belong coherently
together by virtue of the common disease energy expressing them?

which one?
andrew

At 07:12 PM 6/18/2002 +1000, you wrote:
No sir,

What we call disease IS a mistunement of the vital force (aphorism
11). They are not too separate entities. They are one. This is basic
homoeopathy. The dynamis behind all the signs and symptoms (including those
caused by complex miasms where each miasm may need a separate remedy) is
the vital force. As Hahnemann says complex diseases do NOT affect the
"unity of life" (aphorism 42) . The vital force constantly deals with
diversity of causation and disease states. That the mistunement of the
vital force and the disease state (simple or compound) is NOT ONE is a
dualistic view of the mechanist and reductionist. How can the disease state
be separate from the patient? That is impossible. The dictionary definition
of a "patient" is one who is suffering that comes to see the healing artist.
Every case must be individualized according to causes, signs and
symptoms of the mistuned vital force of the patient. It is not a matter of
either number 1 or 2 as if clinical realities can not be divided into two
overly simplistic categories that you might considered right or wrong. This
is a reductionist notion. Homeopathy is a system of flexible response that
can be tailored to meet any number of diverse clinical situations that one
must face in a full medical practice.

1. If the characteristic symptoms of the patient are a homogeneous unified
expression the remedy is chosen by the essential rubrics of that unified
expression.

2. If the characteristic symptoms of the patient are presented as an
traumatic injury, an acute disorder, or acute miasm the remedy is chosen
by the exciting causes and active symptoms of the acute crisis not the
chronic symptoms.

3. If the symptoms of the patient are based on chronic fundamental causes
in layers the remedy is centered on the prominent active layer. Sometimes,
one remedy may treat an number of layers in their natural order (active,
latent and dormant) and at other times it may take a series of remedies. We
have amble cured cases that show both realities. The final selection of the
remedy depends on the nature of the symptoms and the remedy to which the
characteristics point.

4. If the symptoms of the patient is based on complex miasms the remedy is
chosen by the symptoms of the most active layer of the complex disease
first and then the subsequent layers of the complex are treated as their
symptoms become more active. This may take an alternation of more than one
remedy by the symptoms over a longer period of time or a series of remedies
chosen in the same fashion. If one multi-miasmic remedy suits the complex
miasms it may be able to remove a complex state. We have ample cured cases
that demonstrate both principles. The final selection of the remedy depends
on the nature of the symptoms and the nature of the remedy to which the
characteristics point.

In all of these situation the remedy for patient is selected by the
nature of the disease state in accordance with time and circumstance as
well as the nature of the remedy or remedies that are indicated. Therefore
the nature of the totality of the symptoms is adjusted to suit the nature
of the disease manifestations of each individual patient.

Sincerely, David Little
---------------
"It is the life-force which cures diseases because a dead man needs no more
medicines."

Samuel Hahnemann

Visit our website on Hahnemannian Homoeopathy and Cyberspace Homoeopathic
Academy at
http://www.simillimum.com
David Little © 2000

all the signs and symptoms (including those
the vital force.

There is a difficulty: disease is indeed the mistunement of the VF, but it
is not become identified with the VF per se. It remains, as you say,
'behind' the symptoms from an ontological point of view, although its
interaction with the disease ields the symptoms. Therefore, it can express
two disease states simultaneously, and in a variety of ways and
circumstances such as you have described with clarity. There can be more
than one 'player' on the 'stage.'

Failure to see this leads to the foolish view that since the organism is
one, and since the VF empowers this one organism, there can be only [by
definition] ever be one disease energy present.

andrew
Every case must be individualized according to causes, signs and
symptoms of the mistuned vital force of the patient. It is not a matter of
either number 1 or 2 as if clinical realities can not be divided into two
overly simplistic categories that you might considered right or wrong. This
is a reductionist notion. Homeopathy is a system of flexible response that
can be tailored to meet any number of diverse clinical situations that one
must face in a full medical practice.

1. If the characteristic symptoms of the patient are a homogeneous unified
expression the remedy is chosen by the essential rubrics of that unified
expression.

2. If the characteristic symptoms of the patient are presented as an
traumatic injury, an acute disorder, or acute miasm the remedy is chosen
by the exciting causes and active symptoms of the acute crisis not the
chronic symptoms.

3. If the symptoms of the patient are based on chronic fundamental causes
in layers the remedy is centered on the prominent active layer. Sometimes,
one remedy may treat an number of layers in their natural order (active,
latent and dormant) and at other times it may take a series of remedies. We
have amble cured cases that show both realities. The final selection of the
remedy depends on the nature of the symptoms and the remedy to which the
characteristics point.

4. If the symptoms of the patient is based on complex miasms the remedy is
chosen by the symptoms of the most active layer of the complex disease
first and then the subsequent layers of the complex are treated as their
symptoms become more active. This may take an alternation of more than one
remedy by the symptoms over a longer period of time or a series of remedies
chosen in the same fashion. If one multi-miasmic remedy suits the complex
miasms it may be able to remove a complex state. We have ample cured cases
that demonstrate both principles. The final selection of the remedy depends
on the nature of the symptoms and the nature of the remedy to which the
characteristics point.

In all of these situation the remedy for patient is selected by the
nature of the disease state in accordance with time and circumstance as
well as the nature of the remedy or remedies that are indicated. Therefore
the nature of the totality of the symptoms is adjusted to suit the nature
of the disease manifestations of each individual patient.

Sincerely, David Little
---------------
"It is the life-force which cures diseases because a dead man needs no more
medicines."

Samuel Hahnemann

Visit our website on Hahnemannian Homoeopathy and Cyberspace Homoeopathic
Academy at
http://www.simillimum.com
David Little © 2000
ATTENTION PLEASE:

The Minutus Group is established purely for the promotion of Homoeopathy and
educational benefit of its members. It makes no representations regarding
the individual suitability of the information contained in any document read
or advice or recommendation offered which appears on this website and/or
email postings for any purpose. The entire risk arising out of their use
remains with the recipient. In no event shall the minutus site or its
individual members be liable for any direct, consequential, incidental,
special, punitive or other damages whatsoever and howsoever caused.

****
If you do not wish to receive individual emails, send a message with the
subject of 'Digest' to ashahrdar@yahoo.com to receive a single daily digest.

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
minutus-unsubscribe@egroups.com

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/