Quote:
Originally Posted by bigbyte
Hi I have just found this forum, there are some very interesting threads. This one caught my eye and I thought I would make my first contribution here.
Samuel Hahnemann's insights are still just as relevant today as they were back then.
|
I would not necessarily disagree on that. But how relevant ARE they, really?
Quote:
|
Allopathic medical science has developed sophisticated medicines that are designed to do exactly the same things as their crude historical counterparts, based on the same philosophy that 'the symptom is the disease'.
|
No, this is factually wrong. If you are referring to modern medicine (the 'allopathy' that Hahnemann referred to hardly exists anymore), it does not concern itself much with symptoms, except for the purpose of diagnoses, it is concerned with disease
causes.
Quote:
|
I have just published a book it can be found on Amazon 'The symptom is not the disease' which looks at these issues and looks at homoeopathic philosophy for the lay person and the experienced Homoeopath.
|
That is a bit strange, because Hahnemann explicitly claims that the disease is only characterized by its symptoms:
Quote:
§ 6 (Organon of Medicine, Sixth Edition)
The unprejudiced observer - well aware of the futility of transcendental speculations which can receive no confirmation from experience - be his powers of penetration ever so great, takes note of nothing in every individual disease, except the changes in the health of the body and of the mind (morbid phenomena, accidents, symptoms) which can be perceived externally by means of the senses; that is to say, he notices only the deviations from the former healthy state of the now diseased individual, which are felt by the patient himself, remarked by those around him and observed by the physician. All these perceptible signs represent the disease in its whole extent, that is, together they form the true and only conceivable portrait of the disease.
|
(My bolding)
How do you explain this?
Hans