Page 1 of 3

Organon

Posted: Mon Jan 03, 2005 12:16 pm
by Soroush Ebrahimi
Dear Shannon
Thank you for your comment below - I think you have put your finger on the
exact point.

Last year when I was on a visit to Tehran, Dr Shahrdar asked me to talk
about homoeopathy to the 2nd and 3rd year students. Topic was open and to my
choice.

So I decided to warn about deviating from Hahnemann's instructions and about
poly pharmacy etc.

A hand went up and a student asked about experimentation.

The question was very valid. So I used my industrial experience to explain.
In industry there is a constant improvement for improvement on all front. I
used to work as a Project Leader in a paper mill. So errors to process could
cost hours of production loss! We had to be careful.

Before any 'trial' on the paper machine we had to draw up a paper explaining
the back ground to the area of work, what was the problem, how it could be
improved, results of any experimental lab work, and the course of action we
intended to take, resources needed etc etc.

This was the circulated to all the managers in the Mill and if there were no
objections we proceeded with the experiment and then reported the result,
positive or negative with a recommendation of what further steps were
necessary.

When it comes to homoeopathy, we observe that firstly the VAST majority of
colleagues who have not read the Organon from cover to cover or if they have
it was ages ago and most of it has been forgotten. Few have had the
privilege of having someone like Sheilagh Creasy teaching them the ins and
outs of it.

These guys then proceed to practise and in their practise they encounter
problems.
They also may be start to teach in one of the colleges.

They then start to experiment and then write a book and I suspect report
only the positive results. Because they have been teachers, they
automatically have a following of the students who have been taught by them.
Some people then regard these guys as torch bearers and as someone who knows
the way, not thinking that in darkness you could have a torch but be equally
as lost as the one without the torch. So books are written and ideas
expressed in seminars and a lot of people are led astray.

My suggestion was that if you encounter a problem, try and read about it,
ask colleagues and elders and betters and do not feel shy about it. (This
is one of the areas where Minutus is in-valuable).

If you come to an area where you really think Hahnemann has not explored or
reported up on, again double check with colleagues and some of the masters
around you. If you are still confident that the problem is real, no one has
explored it and it needs work, then draw up your plan and have it checked
out and the proceed with the experiment with caution. Because we are
dealing with the health of fellow humans we have to take extreme care and DO
NO HARM.

So when Hn clearly speaks against poly pharmacy and the way doses should be
repeated, do I need to try and re-invent the wheel and teach every one else
how the dosage should be controlled? My answer is no. Understand what
Hahnemann is saying should be my first task.

Regards
Soroush

Message: 12
Date: Sun, 02 Jan 2005 08:31:20 -0600
From: Robert&Shannon Nelson
Subject: Re: Teaching the Organon

Snip
I think that further *development* of Hahnemann's ideas is inevitable, but
"development" does *mean* that the further movement is based upon the prior
position, and how can you "develop" what you don't know or understand the
starting point? But those who *do* know and understand the Organon, do not
seem to feel much need for "developing" it, but only for understanding and
applying. At least, that has been my impression so far.
Snip

Re: Organon

Posted: Tue Jan 04, 2005 2:31 am
by Julian Winston
At 11:17 AM +0000 1/3/05, Finrod wrote:

[snip]
That is the crux of the problem. Well stated.
Also, unless one keeps it in mind, one tends to forget what one knows
and thus teach from a point of unconscious competence. Folks who do
are generally GOOD clinicians, but lousy teachers-- because they have
lost conscious touch with what they actually know.
One of my early teachers, Jacques Imberechts, kept three books on his
desk-- all set out in alphabetical order. One was labelled "Materia
Medica" one labelled "Cases" and one labelled "Philosophy." In the
first he would record the details of successful prescriptions, in the
second he would record the "cases" (like putting otitis under "O")
and cross referencing it with the MM book. In the third (and the most
important here) he would annotate where he noted agreement or not
with Hahnemann's writings-- i.e., Hahnemann says in Para. xxx
that.... and I just saw that in this case.
In this way, he had a real record of what he was doing. But to DO SO,
one has to be conversant with the Organon!
Indeed!!

JW

Re: Organon

Posted: Sat Oct 08, 2011 8:48 am
by Soroush Ebrahimi
Do I take it that no one is interested in us going through the Organon?
Soroush

Re: Organon

Posted: Sat Oct 08, 2011 9:57 am
by Dr. DHMS
Couldn't understand what you mean Soroush? No previous reference ....
dhms

________________________________

From: "finrod@finrod.co.uk"
To: minutus@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Saturday, October 8, 2011 11:48 AM
Subject: [Minutus] Organon
Do I take it that no one is interested in us going through the Organon?
Soroush

Re: Organon

Posted: Sat Oct 08, 2011 6:37 pm
by Ginny Wilken
I am interested, Soroush. I didn't know you needed our approval. I miss Lois' list.

ginny
________________________________

From: finrod@finrod.co.uk
To: minutus@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, October 7, 2011 11:48:02 PM
Subject: [Minutus] Organon
Do I take it that no one is interested in us going through the Organon?
Soroush

Re: Organon

Posted: Sun Oct 09, 2011 4:35 pm
by Gregory Pais, ND, DHANP
Hi Soroush,

I think that's a great idea. Should we start withe the introduction or go right to the 1st aphorism?
Peace,
Gregory

Gregory Pais, ND, DHANP
580 E. 3rd St. 570-320-0747
Williamsport PA 17701
gpaisnd@whnow.com
www.foroptimalhealth.com
www.facebook.com/NaturalDoc

Re: Organon

Posted: Sun Oct 09, 2011 11:51 pm
by suncat76
I am interested also.
Leora

Re: Organon

Posted: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:58 am
by Jeff Tikari gmail
To those who doggedly adhere to Aph 1 and its foot note, please read the introduction to the third edition of the Organon.
"In this third edition I have not refrained from making any alterations and emendations suggested by increased knowledge and necessitated by further experience."
Hahenemann advises us not to "refrain" from making "alterations and emendations", if "suggested by increased knowledge and necessitated by further experience."
Jeff

Re: Organon

Posted: Mon Feb 25, 2013 3:10 am
by Sheri Nakken
and he wrote 3 other editions after that and you are not Hahnemann, nor am I, sorry to say.
Sheri

At 05:58 PM 2/24/2013, you wrote:

Re: Organon

Posted: Mon Feb 25, 2013 3:56 am
by John Harvey
I wondered what the context of your comment was, Jeff. Is there a
higher calling after all for physicians, in weaving empty
speculations? Or was Hahnemann otherwise mistaken in his view of the
ideal of medicine?

The most relevant possibility would seem to be the observation that
aetiology now has a fairly good factual basis, making it always
potentially useful in rational medicine.

Naturally, aetiology's usefulness cannnot change the nature of
homoeopathy, any more than the usefulness of medical history (and the
light it shines on miasms), the usefulness of mnemonics (and their
ability to help us recall details of medicines), or the usefulness of
exercise (and its effect in helping patients respond robustly to
health challenges) can. Despite their usefulness, exercise,
mnemonics, and aetiology are not, and never can be, part of what
homoeopathy actually is.

Any attempt to replace symptoms as the basis of homoeopathic
prescription with anything else is doomed to failure; not because a
truly useful prescription is necessarily impossible by other means,
but merely because that would be another method, not homoeopathy,
which inherently uses symptoms. But if the value of aetiology in
other senses is what you are driving at, then there is probably little
to no dissension here. To use the unobservable as a basis for
prescription is deviating from homoeopathy per se, which depends
utterly on knowing the effects of a medicine in deranging health. But
there must be wide scope for its to other ends. Perhaps you'd like to
elaborate?

Cheers --

John
--
"There is no exercise better for the heart than reaching down and lifting
people up."
— John Andrew Holmes, Jr.