Proving
Posted: Sun Jan 05, 2003 12:51 pm
Colleagues
Hn was a scientist.
With limited resources he did well to establish a scientific basis for his
work in MM and pharmacy.
This is why although some of its concepts are difficult to demonstrate
scientifically, nonetheless Homoeopathy is Scientific with Laws and
principles (as apposed to allopathy).
While realising that there are forces in the Creation about which we know
nothing and that there are people around who become sensitive to these
forces from time-to-time and can use them effectively, we must make progress
on what we know well, and know that it works well. [I would use the fact
that Radio waves have been in existence since the beginning of the Universe,
but we have only got to know about them for just over 100 years and are now
making fantastic use of them.]
A homoeopath MUST know the tools of his trade.
An important tool of a homoeopath is his knowledge of MM. This must be based
on rock based evidence which will stand up to scrutiny and is repeatable.
Look at Hn's proving of Sepia - How is it that no one has managed to come up
with an additional symptom? Because he did this proving VERY thoroughly.
Hn has detailed exactly how a proving should be done and has even dictated
the diet the prover should have so as not to influence the reaction of the
vital force to the action of the remedy.
Just assume that you are in a court of Law and the prosecution asks:
Assuming Homoeopathy works according to its principles established by Hn,
what was the basis of your choice of remedy X for this patient?
If the answer comes out, Oh I based my choice on the dream proving of X, my
money would be on the fact that the prosecution would win and Homoeopathy
(not the homoeopath being prosecuted) would lose. Therefore we should do
nothing to harm homoeopathy's standing.
Also such non-homoeopathic provings can only be established if any one can
demonstrate that the results can be reproduced from one dreamer/conference
to another.
How will we get the reproducible proving point of 'Least slightest movement'
of Bryonia in a dream proving when it is easy demonstrated in a physical
proving?
With the dictate of Cause No Harm, I would not wish to base my prescription
on someone's dream not knowing what they have been up to previously!
Enjoy the New Year and HEAL WELL.
Soroush
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Hn was a scientist.
With limited resources he did well to establish a scientific basis for his
work in MM and pharmacy.
This is why although some of its concepts are difficult to demonstrate
scientifically, nonetheless Homoeopathy is Scientific with Laws and
principles (as apposed to allopathy).
While realising that there are forces in the Creation about which we know
nothing and that there are people around who become sensitive to these
forces from time-to-time and can use them effectively, we must make progress
on what we know well, and know that it works well. [I would use the fact
that Radio waves have been in existence since the beginning of the Universe,
but we have only got to know about them for just over 100 years and are now
making fantastic use of them.]
A homoeopath MUST know the tools of his trade.
An important tool of a homoeopath is his knowledge of MM. This must be based
on rock based evidence which will stand up to scrutiny and is repeatable.
Look at Hn's proving of Sepia - How is it that no one has managed to come up
with an additional symptom? Because he did this proving VERY thoroughly.
Hn has detailed exactly how a proving should be done and has even dictated
the diet the prover should have so as not to influence the reaction of the
vital force to the action of the remedy.
Just assume that you are in a court of Law and the prosecution asks:
Assuming Homoeopathy works according to its principles established by Hn,
what was the basis of your choice of remedy X for this patient?
If the answer comes out, Oh I based my choice on the dream proving of X, my
money would be on the fact that the prosecution would win and Homoeopathy
(not the homoeopath being prosecuted) would lose. Therefore we should do
nothing to harm homoeopathy's standing.
Also such non-homoeopathic provings can only be established if any one can
demonstrate that the results can be reproduced from one dreamer/conference
to another.
How will we get the reproducible proving point of 'Least slightest movement'
of Bryonia in a dream proving when it is easy demonstrated in a physical
proving?
With the dictate of Cause No Harm, I would not wish to base my prescription
on someone's dream not knowing what they have been up to previously!
Enjoy the New Year and HEAL WELL.
Soroush
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]