Constitution: Digest: Minutus Number 292
Posted: Sun Oct 28, 2001 3:47 pm
Dear Co-Minutusists,
Dear Piet,
you say in your
It's not me who said it, it's Samuel Hahnemann, I merely quoted the last
sentence of § 6 of the Organon, as could be seen at the inverted commas
"..."
No, I have not forgotten it. Why should I?
§ 5 and § 6 complement to the "Gestalt der Krankheit" 'the disease in
its whole extent'.
There is no contradiction, why should there be one?
If you want to call 'emotional and spiritual tendencies' "full
psychological picture", you can do so, if it suit you better - as long
as you are an "unprejudiced observer", the problem, however, is that
clinging to a certain psychological ideology will bias your view.
§ 6 Organon
"- die Nichtigkeit übersinnlicher Ergrübelungen kennend, die sich in der
Erfahrung nicht nachweisen
lassen - "
"- well aware of the futility of transcendental speculations which can
receive no confirmation from experience -"
Temperament, on the other hand, is term of a very old ancient Greek
concept, there are differences in defining the four temperaments between
Pytagoras and Hippocrates, between Aristotle and Galen, between Avecinna
and Paracelsus.
The teaching of the four temperaments is one of the concepts of the "Old
Medicine" which Hahnemann freed us from. Mostly, it is one of those
futile "transcendental speculations", one can indulge sitting at fire,
having a drink, small talk, leisure time ...
As far as homeopathy is concerned, that concept is pretty useless to
find the right remedy.
There are more than four different types of people, and more than 12 (if
you take the so called second temperament into account)
As Hahnemann says in § 81 of the Organon:
"...welche Menge von Umständen zur Bildung dieser großen Verschiedenheit
chronischer Krankheiten (secundäre Symptome der Psora) beizutragen
pflegen, auch außer der unbeschreiblichen Mannigfaltigkeit der Menschen
in ihren angebornen Körper-Constitutionen, welche schon für sich so
unendlich von einander abweichen,"
"we consider what a number of circumstances contribute to the production
of these great
varieties of chronic diseases (secondary symptoms of psora), besides the
indescribable diversity of men in respect of their congenital corporeal
constitutions,"
More I don't need to say, because there is this marvelous article by
Ardavan:
"Is Homoeopathy a Constitutional Treatment?"
http://www.minutus.com/constitution.htm
Some further information on the history of the terms 'constition,
temperament' you can find on Davis Little's website
http://www.simillimum.com/ You only have to browse a bit through it,
'till you find the information, but it's worthwhile anyway.
Don't be cross
Best regards
Dear Andrew,
you write in your
Yes you are right:
No 1, however, would apply as well as long the body is concerned. That's
to say whether the body can put up with that fundamental energy or not,
and how this energy is conveyed and refelcted by the body
To cover No 3 and 4 as well:
(I don't like that term 'temperament' see above - I would rather say
"make-up, tendency" - the latter one Hahnemann used as well "Neigung
(Tendenz)" § 136 Organon. "Neigung" means more or less 'incination')
To express the meaning of 3 and 4 Hahnemann used the term
"Seelenbeschaffenheit" (see § 136 Organon)
"Seele" is very difficult to translate, becaused it means a lot more in
German than in English, its meaning oscilates, 'soul', 'mind', 'emotion'
and sometimes even 'spirit' can be translations, even so the dictionary
only gives 'soul' (I know from my own experience, when I translated
texts on spriritual subjects)
Hahnemann's terminology is very precise, as you can see in § 136 where
he speaks of "Leibes- und Seelenbeschaffenheit" 'corporeal and mental
constitution'.
I love to read Hahnemann's Organon, when I first glanced over the
Organon I was very fascinated by the table of content alone - but there
was so much more ... The language of the Organon always reminds me of
Friedrich Schiller's prose writings. By the way Schiller, too, was a
trained physician, who was disgusted by the methods of the old medicine
and perfered to become a poet.
That's a very difficult question. I think the key is unbiased
observation.
To messure changes is but one thing, one yardstick would be what the
patient (and others) consider having changed, the other what he thinks
is abnormal, another what deviates from what is considered to be
healthy.
Thus the question arises: What is health?
And that's difficult, cause we all - being inflicted with psora - have
diffifculties in knowing what health is and above all we certainly are
far away from being sure that our lives and habitats are healthy.
If we go on pondering on those thoughts we end up indulging in futile
specualtions.
So I think there is only one thing: observe, make/let the pt talk, note
it down and observe.
All the best to all of you
Claudia
Heavenly Father give peace and harmony to all Your chidren.
Dear Piet,
you say in your
It's not me who said it, it's Samuel Hahnemann, I merely quoted the last
sentence of § 6 of the Organon, as could be seen at the inverted commas
"..."
No, I have not forgotten it. Why should I?
§ 5 and § 6 complement to the "Gestalt der Krankheit" 'the disease in
its whole extent'.
There is no contradiction, why should there be one?
If you want to call 'emotional and spiritual tendencies' "full
psychological picture", you can do so, if it suit you better - as long
as you are an "unprejudiced observer", the problem, however, is that
clinging to a certain psychological ideology will bias your view.
§ 6 Organon
"- die Nichtigkeit übersinnlicher Ergrübelungen kennend, die sich in der
Erfahrung nicht nachweisen
lassen - "
"- well aware of the futility of transcendental speculations which can
receive no confirmation from experience -"
Temperament, on the other hand, is term of a very old ancient Greek
concept, there are differences in defining the four temperaments between
Pytagoras and Hippocrates, between Aristotle and Galen, between Avecinna
and Paracelsus.
The teaching of the four temperaments is one of the concepts of the "Old
Medicine" which Hahnemann freed us from. Mostly, it is one of those
futile "transcendental speculations", one can indulge sitting at fire,
having a drink, small talk, leisure time ...
As far as homeopathy is concerned, that concept is pretty useless to
find the right remedy.
There are more than four different types of people, and more than 12 (if
you take the so called second temperament into account)
As Hahnemann says in § 81 of the Organon:
"...welche Menge von Umständen zur Bildung dieser großen Verschiedenheit
chronischer Krankheiten (secundäre Symptome der Psora) beizutragen
pflegen, auch außer der unbeschreiblichen Mannigfaltigkeit der Menschen
in ihren angebornen Körper-Constitutionen, welche schon für sich so
unendlich von einander abweichen,"
"we consider what a number of circumstances contribute to the production
of these great
varieties of chronic diseases (secondary symptoms of psora), besides the
indescribable diversity of men in respect of their congenital corporeal
constitutions,"
More I don't need to say, because there is this marvelous article by
Ardavan:
"Is Homoeopathy a Constitutional Treatment?"
http://www.minutus.com/constitution.htm
Some further information on the history of the terms 'constition,
temperament' you can find on Davis Little's website
http://www.simillimum.com/ You only have to browse a bit through it,
'till you find the information, but it's worthwhile anyway.
Don't be cross
Best regards
Dear Andrew,
you write in your
Yes you are right:
No 1, however, would apply as well as long the body is concerned. That's
to say whether the body can put up with that fundamental energy or not,
and how this energy is conveyed and refelcted by the body
To cover No 3 and 4 as well:
(I don't like that term 'temperament' see above - I would rather say
"make-up, tendency" - the latter one Hahnemann used as well "Neigung
(Tendenz)" § 136 Organon. "Neigung" means more or less 'incination')
To express the meaning of 3 and 4 Hahnemann used the term
"Seelenbeschaffenheit" (see § 136 Organon)
"Seele" is very difficult to translate, becaused it means a lot more in
German than in English, its meaning oscilates, 'soul', 'mind', 'emotion'
and sometimes even 'spirit' can be translations, even so the dictionary
only gives 'soul' (I know from my own experience, when I translated
texts on spriritual subjects)
Hahnemann's terminology is very precise, as you can see in § 136 where
he speaks of "Leibes- und Seelenbeschaffenheit" 'corporeal and mental
constitution'.
I love to read Hahnemann's Organon, when I first glanced over the
Organon I was very fascinated by the table of content alone - but there
was so much more ... The language of the Organon always reminds me of
Friedrich Schiller's prose writings. By the way Schiller, too, was a
trained physician, who was disgusted by the methods of the old medicine
and perfered to become a poet.
That's a very difficult question. I think the key is unbiased
observation.
To messure changes is but one thing, one yardstick would be what the
patient (and others) consider having changed, the other what he thinks
is abnormal, another what deviates from what is considered to be
healthy.
Thus the question arises: What is health?
And that's difficult, cause we all - being inflicted with psora - have
diffifculties in knowing what health is and above all we certainly are
far away from being sure that our lives and habitats are healthy.
If we go on pondering on those thoughts we end up indulging in futile
specualtions.
So I think there is only one thing: observe, make/let the pt talk, note
it down and observe.
All the best to all of you
Claudia
Heavenly Father give peace and harmony to all Your chidren.