Hans,
CONTINUED
The "totality of symptoms" associated with each medicine is first carefully studied in the healthy.
(22) Substances become medicines because they can arouse certain symptoms and signs which can destroy symptoms/signs
which exist in the natural disease of the patient, PROVIDED that the two sets of symptoms closely match, established by pure experiment. Administered properly potentised in small doses, the medicine will rapidly and permanently destroy the totality of symptoms in the patient and therefore the disease.
Not only has this thesis been thoroughly been contradicted by science, it is also illogical. Even based on the rest of Hahnemanns theories, it requires a complete leap of faith to believe that matching the symptoms should somehow affect the disease.
It has not been contradicted by Science, just not accepted.
How is it illogical? THAT IT ACTUALLY HAPPENS makes it the truth. No faith required.
(26) A natural law of Homeopathy: In living organisms, a weaker dynamic affection is permanently extinguished by a stronger one (in this case, the medicine) which, though different in nature, greatly resembles it in expression.
This is evidently wrong, and it is difficult to see how Hahnemann might have drawn such a conclusion from any practical studies. You do not need to observe any great number of pationts to conclude that one person can be affected by several diseases at one time, each causing its own characteristic symptoms. Actually, most people have experienced such a thing themselves. Calling this a "natural law" can only be termed as ridiculous. Even if it were true, it would still not explain how homeopathic medicine works, since it still requires a leap of faith to believe that the weaker presentation is permanently suppressed.
You misunderstand ..the wording is not very clear so I will change it. In APh (26), Hahnemann is referring to ONE Natural Disease (calling it the weaker dynamic affection in this case), and the medicine (stronger dynamic affection) which "greatly resembles it in expression". You are interpreting it as two diseases. You are also missing the resemblence in expression - the two must have THE SAME SYMPTOMS.
Also, "a natural law of Homeopathy", already discussed, is one derived through observation and experimentation.
(31) Disease agents do not have the absolute power to untune our VF. We fall ill ONLY when susceptible, for whatever reason. So, disease agents do not make everybody sick each time.
This is correct, and is satisfactorily explained by the functioning of the immune system. I might faint.
(32) On the other hand, medicines (conceptually "artificial diseases") affect EVERY person, EVERY time, to bring about its characteristic symptom pattern.
This is not correct. Various preparations may affect individuals differently.
I beg to differ. Hahnemannian begs to differ. All Homeopaths beg to differ. If that were not true, Homeopathy could not possibly work properly nor consistently.
(33) The medicine must be both very similar in symptoms to the natural disease AND stronger than it. In this situation, the medicine transfers the untunement of the VF caused by the natural disease to an artificial disease condition, but only when very similar in symptoms to the natural one. The natural disease becomes disengaged or taken over, and extinguished. The medicinal artificial disease, when the body realises there is no disease agent, then quickly wanes leaving only health.
Unfounded, and illogical thesis.
A theoretical or conceptual explanation for the observations made. But, what matters is that the ARE the observations, i.e., what happens.
(35) Medicines which are not homeopathic will never cure any disease.
Obviously untrue. Hahnemann might be excused for thinking this, as the record of medical science in his time was not exactly impressive, but present-day Homeopaths can only perpetuate such a notion by blatantly lying (or complete ignorance).
Explain your prejudice.
(38) Two dissimilar diseases meeting in a person will compete such that the stronger will temporarily suppress and
suspend the milder one until the stronger disease has run its course. Then, the milder disease reappears, uncured, to
express its symptoms.
Interesting! This contradicts the very idea of how Homeopathy is supposed to work. If the suppression is temporary, how can it cure?
You are not distinguishing "disease/disease" interaction from "disease/medicine" interaction. You have also missed the "dissimilar"- homeopathy can never cure except through similarity of total symptoms.
(42) Two similar natural diseases cannot ward off or suspend each other such that one comes back after the disappearance of the most recent. Neither can they coexist in the same organism if they are similar in symptoms and effects. The stronger DESTROYS the weaker.
The VF can only become "untuned" by ONE disease at any one time. In this case, the weaker disease is completely extinguished by the stronger...the weaker was only a "dynamic" affection anyway.
No matter how often this is repeated, it remains totally wrong.
Where is the repetition?
(54) Allopathy (Convention Medicine, in Hahnemann's time):
(A). Allopathy generally uses speculation and scholastic arguments instead of observation of natural phenomena and
experimentation.
(B). "Cure" in disease means a material to be expelled.
(C). Uses mixed drugs and crude (large) doses.
(D). Maintains its credibility through palliative relief.
There may have been much truth in this in 1810. As most people have noticed, however, this is not 1810.
Not 1810, but we must interpret this book from Hahnemann's perspective. WHY? Because HE SUCCEEDED with very many "incurable" diseases around today.
(63) Every medicine that acts to alter the VF, brings about modifications to health called the PRIMARY ACTION. The primary action is a product of both the medicine and the VF, but mainly the former. The VF is initially passive, and accepts the medicine's action.
But later, the VF tends to oppose the influence by the medicine, and this is called the SECONDARY ACTION. And this opposite action usually matches the strength of the medicine's primary action.
(66) But small Homeopathic doses produce a primary action which is barely perceptible at all, and the VF's opposite secondary action is the same.
(68) The medicine may introduce a slight medicinal disease ALONE in the body, but it is fleeting and mild, and so the VF can easily act on this small disturbance to restore complete cure.
Pure, unfounded speculation.
Based on over 50 years observation..by a man who was the best observer of symptoms (the tools of his trade) who ever lived (by a million miles). History records the thousands of people he cured.
Diseases are ACUTE or CHRONIC. Acute diseases are rapid disease processes/untunements of the VF which run their course
and end quickly. Chronic diseases, enigmatic initially, dynamically untune the living organism from health gradually in their own characteristic way. The VF can only imperfectly resist. As disease progresses, the VF becomes ever more untuned, until death. These diseases are inherited, i.e., genetic in origin, but are still considered, in nature, to be "dynamic" contagions.
Wrong. Some (chronic) diseases are genetic or have a genetic vector, but not all. The distinction between acute and chronic diseases is partly arbitrary, depending on available treatment. A lot of diseases that were previously considered chronic are curable today.
And a lot of chronic diseases (affecting many millions in USA & UK, for example), considered incurable today were completely cured by Hahnemann...the motivation behind the current task.
(73) Acute diseases are brought on by harmful influences, but are mostly "flare-ups" of a latent chronic disease, which then returns to a dormant state if the flare-up is not too severe, nor long acting.
This is not correct. There are diseases that act as described, but they are not in majority. He begs to differ.
(74) Chronic: Must include all the diseases artificially created by Allopathy, which relentlessly weaken the VF. For example, true local inflammations are cured by Homeopathic medicines that dynamically remove the underlying arterial irritations, yet the Allopathic solution may even result in death.
Bashing 1810 medical science; not without reason. But irrelevant today.
(77) Persistent diseases resulting from avoidable noxious influences that are not chronic, go away on their own when living conditions are improved.
Yes, some of them do.
(78) True chronic diseases arise from inherited factors, and continue to worsen until death, even in those with robust
constitutions and in ideal living conditions. A young person may appear to be healthy, but a chronic disease may be present which remains hidden for years, only to emerge later after stressful events.
Such diseases exist.
(79) Three categories of chronic diseases:
1. Syphilis, 2. Gonorrhoea (sycosis) are chronic diseases which persist until death if not treated.
Two good examples of diseases considered chronic in the 19th century, but which have later been found to be simple, treatable, infectous diseases. Since they were even at his time known as veneral diseases, it is a little surprising that Hahnemann lumps them with the chronic diseases which he has just claimed were genetic.
Syphilis and Gonorrhoea are now simply treated with antibiotics. But how much longer will we be able to beat the bacteria wit antibiotics? I will check out the actually wording again re. chronic diseases being inherited. (Is it ALL or just the PSORA, or not all the PSORA).
(126) Provers must be trustworthy and conscientious.
I sure like this one.
The PROVING of the medicines was considered a critical task. Symptoms gathered according to guidelines in a meticulous way by the provers. Inaccuracies would jeopardise the whole task.
(128) Crude medicinal substances do not express all their symptoms nearly as well as when potentised, e.g., to 30c.
With these potencies, their virtues are developed to an unbelievable degree.
Unbelievable is the word. You're comical, Hans. You think the whole of Homeopathy is phony...the whole institution, college courses, material medicae, repertories, journals, pharmacies, millions involved...all phony cos Hans, who has never opened up a Homeopathy book, says so.
(215) Almost ALL so-called mental or emotional diseases are nothing but physical diseases in which mental symptoms usually increase as the physical symptoms diminish, until the disease mental symptoms reach their most striking state of defectiveness.
Actually, he might turn out to have a point here, albeit based on an entirely materialistic POV. And of course he is wrong about a number of mental diseases caused by birth/genetic defects and various trauma.
Your point puzzles me: "he is wrong about.."??? He said "Almost all..".
(244) Re. Intermittent diseases of marshy areas (malaria, etc.): A young healthy person can become accustomed to it and stay healthy provided his way of life is exactly right. The intermittent fevers endemic to this marshy areas will only affect him if he is a newcomer. But then, ONE, or possibly TWO, minute doses of highly potentised cinchona bark will likely fully restore him to health.
But, if full recovery does not occur with cinchona bark, it means that there is an underlying Psora developing a chronic condition that requires anti-psoric medicines for cure. However, if the patient is not too ill and therefore not treated with anti-psorics (i.e., the psora has not developed completely and can return to its latent state), these people soon recover if they move to a dry mountainous region - the fever resolves - but they will NEVER become really healthy without the anti-psoric treatment. (Re. footnote to Aphs 244 & 276.)
Since current malaria treatment is loosing efficiency, Homepaths could really make the day here. We can only wonder what they are waiting for.
That's more encouraging. They are not waiting to help. They are waiting for acceptance by the dominant medical system. Politics is part of it.
So, to sum it up, Homeopathy is based on a semi-religious thesis that has been contradicted by science.
Untrue - present evidence.
It jumps to conclusions not logically following from the original thesis.
Untrue - Homeopathy is a rational, logical discipline, just as disciplined as any branch of Science.
It uses an understanding of diseases that has been showed to be wrong,
Who showed it to be wrong? Present detials.
and it finally bases preparation of medicine on a method that has no theoretical basis.
Theoretical? This is futile because you know nothing about the subject. Prove me wrong.
But, you're a nice chap, Hans.
