User Tools

Site Tools


en:hphys:wells-pp-hahnemann-chronic-miasms-159-11001

Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

Both sides previous revision Previous revision
Next revision
Previous revision
en:hphys:wells-pp-hahnemann-chronic-miasms-159-11001 [2013/06/03 20:34]
195.80.163.82
en:hphys:wells-pp-hahnemann-chronic-miasms-159-11001 [2013/06/04 17:48] (current)
195.80.163.82 old revision restored (2013/06/03 22:35)
Line 1: Line 1:
 ====== HAHNEMANN’S CHRONIC MIASMS ====== ====== HAHNEMANN’S CHRONIC MIASMS ======
  
-BY P. P. WELLS, M. D., BROOKLYN. ​ss+BY P. P. WELLS, M. D., BROOKLYN.
  
 If these sources of chronic diseases are remembered in the teachings, literature, or practice of modern Homoeopathy,​ it is oftener than otherwise that a sneer or an attempt at unseemly ridicule may be passed on the first of this series, //psora//, while the second, being too often too apparent to the senses of even the most stolid observer, is allowed to pass in silence, and the third, less obtrusive to the senses, may be safely said to have been permitted to fall into forgetfulness. //​Sycosis//,​ as a basic cause of chronic diseases, can hardly be supposed to have place in the thoughts of the average modern Homoeopathist,​ especially of those who have most to say of Hahnemann’s “fallacies” and “errors.” The first natural inquiry, when one thinks of this neglect, is--Are those who thus sneer at and neglect these teachings of the great, founder of our school of practice more successful in their endeavors to cure chronic diseases than was Hahnemann, or than have been those who have accepted them and made them the basis of their prescriptions for these so commonly fatal maladies? The conviction that these gentlemen have little or no success in this part of their practice is the ready answer that intrudes itself upon us. Indeed, it could hardly have been otherwise in any attempt to cure these maladies by homoeopathic means and methods, the fundamental principles of the homoeopathic philosophy of these diseases being so entirely discarded or ignored. As to the discarded //psora//, Autenrieth--no homoeopath, but a //professor of pathology// in the Tubingen school----went even further than Hahnemann in his assertion that external repelled eruptions were transferred to internal organs and surfaces, and that //he had seen them there// in their original forms many times, though he protected himself from charge of heresy, from his fellows of the old school, by the assurance to them that this fact had nothing whatever to do with the genesis of chronic disease taught by the founder of Homoeopathy,​ and added that “this, like all else that had come from that source, was mere empty air.” Notwithstanding this hedging assurance of the Professor, we think most intelligent minds, after acquaintance with Hahnemann’s teachings of psora as a source of chronic disease, will at once agree that Autenrieth’s discovery goes far in confirmation of those teachings. This discovery of the old-school Professor demonstrates,​ or he is mistaken, the actual presence in internal organs and on internal surfaces of the very translated eruptions which Hahnemann says are causes of so many of the important diseases with which we have to contend. Those of our school who have been most successful healers of chronic diseases have accepted this view of the origin of a large class of those maladies which they have successfully treated, and the best of these were ready to ascribe their known successes to a recognition of this genesis, though the ignorant and the silly were at the same time so free with poor wit and mistimed sneers at the expense of this fundamental teaching of the master, and though others who had only partially come to a knowledge of homoeopathic truth were at the same time seemingly nervously careful to have it understood they “ were not weighted down” with this or other elements of homoeopathic philosophy. If these sources of chronic diseases are remembered in the teachings, literature, or practice of modern Homoeopathy,​ it is oftener than otherwise that a sneer or an attempt at unseemly ridicule may be passed on the first of this series, //psora//, while the second, being too often too apparent to the senses of even the most stolid observer, is allowed to pass in silence, and the third, less obtrusive to the senses, may be safely said to have been permitted to fall into forgetfulness. //​Sycosis//,​ as a basic cause of chronic diseases, can hardly be supposed to have place in the thoughts of the average modern Homoeopathist,​ especially of those who have most to say of Hahnemann’s “fallacies” and “errors.” The first natural inquiry, when one thinks of this neglect, is--Are those who thus sneer at and neglect these teachings of the great, founder of our school of practice more successful in their endeavors to cure chronic diseases than was Hahnemann, or than have been those who have accepted them and made them the basis of their prescriptions for these so commonly fatal maladies? The conviction that these gentlemen have little or no success in this part of their practice is the ready answer that intrudes itself upon us. Indeed, it could hardly have been otherwise in any attempt to cure these maladies by homoeopathic means and methods, the fundamental principles of the homoeopathic philosophy of these diseases being so entirely discarded or ignored. As to the discarded //psora//, Autenrieth--no homoeopath, but a //professor of pathology// in the Tubingen school----went even further than Hahnemann in his assertion that external repelled eruptions were transferred to internal organs and surfaces, and that //he had seen them there// in their original forms many times, though he protected himself from charge of heresy, from his fellows of the old school, by the assurance to them that this fact had nothing whatever to do with the genesis of chronic disease taught by the founder of Homoeopathy,​ and added that “this, like all else that had come from that source, was mere empty air.” Notwithstanding this hedging assurance of the Professor, we think most intelligent minds, after acquaintance with Hahnemann’s teachings of psora as a source of chronic disease, will at once agree that Autenrieth’s discovery goes far in confirmation of those teachings. This discovery of the old-school Professor demonstrates,​ or he is mistaken, the actual presence in internal organs and on internal surfaces of the very translated eruptions which Hahnemann says are causes of so many of the important diseases with which we have to contend. Those of our school who have been most successful healers of chronic diseases have accepted this view of the origin of a large class of those maladies which they have successfully treated, and the best of these were ready to ascribe their known successes to a recognition of this genesis, though the ignorant and the silly were at the same time so free with poor wit and mistimed sneers at the expense of this fundamental teaching of the master, and though others who had only partially come to a knowledge of homoeopathic truth were at the same time seemingly nervously careful to have it understood they “ were not weighted down” with this or other elements of homoeopathic philosophy.
en/hphys/wells-pp-hahnemann-chronic-miasms-159-11001.1370291667.txt.gz · Last modified: 2013/06/03 20:34 by 195.80.163.82