en:ahr:dunham-c-homoeopathy-the-science-of-therapeutics-158-10408
Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
| Both sides previous revision Previous revision | |||
|
en:ahr:dunham-c-homoeopathy-the-science-of-therapeutics-158-10408 [2013/01/13 10:47] 80.86.255.130 |
en:ahr:dunham-c-homoeopathy-the-science-of-therapeutics-158-10408 [2013/01/13 10:51] (current) 80.86.255.130 |
||
|---|---|---|---|
| Line 175: | Line 175: | ||
| {{anchor:s434}}It will be observed that dark colored uterine hemorrhage though produced by Crocus cannot be said to be <span grade2>characteristic</span> of it. {{anchor:s435}}It is a characteristic symptom of a group to which Crocus belongs, but not of Crocus, for it is produced by the other members of this group as well as by Crocus. | {{anchor:s434}}It will be observed that dark colored uterine hemorrhage though produced by Crocus cannot be said to be <span grade2>characteristic</span> of it. {{anchor:s435}}It is a characteristic symptom of a group to which Crocus belongs, but not of Crocus, for it is produced by the other members of this group as well as by Crocus. | ||
| - | {{anchor:s436}}Characteristic symptoms must of necessity be for the most part subjective and seemingly trivial phenomena. {{anchor:s437}}A list of them alone, if presented as the pathogenesis of a drug would be as meaningless and at first sight as ridiculous, as a list of the colors and marks, and angels and curves by which friends recognise each other would be if presented alone as the sum total of the properties of certain genera and species of the Animate Creation. {{anchor:s438}}As a background to the latter, there must be a series of phenomena capable of morphological and organic arrangement, and as the basis of the former we must have a series of objective and organic symptoms capable of physiological and pathological arrangement and of approximate explanation. {{anchor:s439}}But it must never be forgotten that <span grade2>without</span> the <span grade2>characteristics,</span> as we have described them, there can be no <span grade2>individualization</span> and without <span grade2>this</span> there can be no <span grade2>accurate homoeopathic prescription.</span> | + | {{anchor:s436}}Characteristic symptoms must of necessity be for the most part subjective and seemingly trivial phenomena. {{anchor:s437}}A list of them alone, if presented as the pathogenesis of a drug would be as meaningless and at first sight as ridiculous, as a list of the colors and marks, and angles and curves by which friends recognise each other would be if presented alone as the sum total of the properties of certain genera and species of the Animate Creation. {{anchor:s438}}As a background to the latter, there must be a series of phenomena capable of morphological and organic arrangement, and as the basis of the former we must have a series of objective and organic symptoms capable of physiological and pathological arrangement and of approximate explanation. {{anchor:s439}}But it must never be forgotten that <span grade2>without</span> the <span grade2>characteristics,</span> as we have described them, there can be no <span grade2>individualization</span> and without <span grade2>this</span> there can be no <span grade2>accurate homoeopathic prescription.</span> |
| {{anchor:s440}}The truth of this is made apparent by a glance at the history of Homoeopathy. {{anchor:s441}}Certain of Hahnemann's followers discarded the apparently trivial subjective phenomena from the provings of drugs, retaining only the objective, organic symptoms. {{anchor:s442}}They thus lost the means of distinguishing between the individual members of the groups of remedies. {{anchor:s443}}It was thence-forward useless for them to discriminate closely between individual cases of any one type of disease. {{anchor:s444}}Hence inevitably arose the fashion of prescribing a <span grade2>specific</span> remedy for a disease — as the phrase went — putting the leading members of respective groups of drugs and diseases to represent the whole groups. {{anchor:s445}}These were the so-called "specifikers" who had one or two remedies for dysentery, one for hooping cough, one or two for scarlatina, etc., "of whom the world is weary." | {{anchor:s440}}The truth of this is made apparent by a glance at the history of Homoeopathy. {{anchor:s441}}Certain of Hahnemann's followers discarded the apparently trivial subjective phenomena from the provings of drugs, retaining only the objective, organic symptoms. {{anchor:s442}}They thus lost the means of distinguishing between the individual members of the groups of remedies. {{anchor:s443}}It was thence-forward useless for them to discriminate closely between individual cases of any one type of disease. {{anchor:s444}}Hence inevitably arose the fashion of prescribing a <span grade2>specific</span> remedy for a disease — as the phrase went — putting the leading members of respective groups of drugs and diseases to represent the whole groups. {{anchor:s445}}These were the so-called "specifikers" who had one or two remedies for dysentery, one for hooping cough, one or two for scarlatina, etc., "of whom the world is weary." | ||
en/ahr/dunham-c-homoeopathy-the-science-of-therapeutics-158-10408.txt · Last modified: 2013/01/13 10:51 by 80.86.255.130
Page Tools
Except where otherwise noted, content on this wiki is licensed under the following license: CC Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported
