Books about Repertories

[Dana Ullman, MPH]

Friends,
I too love Todd Rowe's book, HOMEOPATHIC METHODOLOGY (and I likewise
think that Karen Allen's book, HOMEOPATHIC REPERTORY: TUTORIAL AND WORKBOOK,
is excellent). However, I disagree with Julian when he says that Todd
doesn't discuss the STRUCTURE of the repertory. In actual fact, chapters
6-9 specific FOCUS on the STRUCTURE of the repertory (and there are only 10
chapters in the book). I guess you can expect this wrath from Julian when
Rowe lists the incorrect date for Kent's writings! (Please take this in the
humor in which it is meant)

CD-ROM with 5 cases and their analysis.

Dana Ullman, MPH
Homeopathic Educational Services
2124 Kittredge St.
Berkeley, CA. 94704
http://www.homeopathic.com
mail@homeopathic.com OR dullman@igc.org
(510)649-0294
(800)359-9051 (orders)
(510)649-1955 (fax)
At 7:57 PM +0000 11/14/03, waymon_cowley wrote:

LOTS of input!
Glad that you found the book of help. There are others that are much
better. Look for a Workbook developed by Karen Allen. It is the best
of the stuff I've seen.
Todd's book (aside from giving the wrong date of Kent's work-- 1877
rather than 1897) does not develop the main features of the repertory
to my taste. It meanders and gives a little of this and that, but
never discussed the STRUCTURE. To learn the book, without the
structure will result in hit and miss selection of exact rubrics.
After teaching basic repertory for the last 15 years, I have found
that developing a full understanding of the structure is critical in
your ability to use the book.
I'll briefly lay it out. It will be in print in the December issue of
Homeopathy Today-- a whole issue on Repertory.

[Julian Winston]

At 11:00 AM -0800 11/15/03, Dana Ullman, MPH wrote:

[snip]
Perhaps I should have modified my comment with the word,
"adequately." Yes Todd discusses the structure. But the writer asked
for feedback, and I simply replied that there are (in my view) better
books from which to learn about the repertory. Any discussion of
Kent's rep without detailing the "cascade" (or whatever you want to
call it) is, in my view, inadequate.
When I took the NCH course at Millersville, the "cascade" was the
first thing shown (although not explained very well). We were urged
to "cut it out and put it in the inside front cover of our repertory
as a reminder of the layout. Mine is still there-- after 23 years.

Incorrect dates could be typos, but 1877 is the date that I've seen
many people use, and I assume it all came from a typo in the original
source (maybe Koehler's Handbook?)

Kent's repertory is such an important document in the history of
homeopathy that its original publication date should be one of those
dates known by all... like:

1755
1796
1810
1833
1835
1843
1846
1849
1880
1897
1916

Those are (to me) important marks in our history. I will leave out
1844 (AIH founded) and 1901 (Hahnemann Monument, Washington DC)
because they are specific to the USA and not universal markers.

And I DO take it in the humor in which it was meant, yet... to me a
clear knowledge of our history is important to understand if we don't
wish to experience it all again.

JW