Differences

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

--- en:saine:hering-law-rule-or-dogma [2013/08/13 12:34]
legatum
+++ en:saine:hering-law-rule-or-dogma [2013/08/14 22:55] (current)
177.116.135.192 [THE HISTORY RELATED TO THE FORMULATION OF HERING'S LAW]
@@ Line 16: / Line 16: @@
 Here Kent does not differentiate between acute and chronic disease in the application of the law. It is reasonable to assume, because of the lack of precision, that he meant all diseases, acute and chronic of venereal and non-venereal origin, would disappear in the direction described above.
-When first studying homeopathy, I listened to the teachers and read the "classic" modern works, and assumed, like my fellow colleagues, that Hering's law had been an irrefutable fact recognized by Hering and the many succeeding generations of homeopaths, and that all patients, (A ll italics used throughout this paper indicate my own emphasis of pertinent points.) acute and chronic, without an exception, would, at all times, be cured in the afore-mentioned direction under careful homeopathic treatment.
+When first studying homeopathy, I listened to the teachers and read the "classic" modern works, and assumed, like my fellow colleagues, that Hering's law had been an irrefutable fact recognized by Hering and the many succeeding generations of homeopaths, and that all patients, (All italics used throughout this paper indicate my own emphasis of pertinent points.) acute and chronic, without an exception, would, at all times, be cured in the afore-mentioned direction under careful homeopathic treatment.
 Later as a practitioner, I carefully applied myself to put the general homeopathic training I had received to the test. Since then, I have been able to substantiate most but not all of the rules, principles and laws contained in the homeopathic doctrine promulgated by several generations of homeopaths.
-So far, however, I have been unable to substantiate Hering's law . Indeed, very rarely do I see, for instance, in a patient with chronic polyarthritis, the symptoms disappearing from the head first and then to the hands and feet. More often, the pain and other joint symptoms disappear in the reverse order of their appearance, even if it is from below upwards. In other words, if the arthritis manifested itself, as it happens at times, first in the knees and then in the ankles, the ankles would get better before the knees.
+So far, however, I have been unable to substantiate Hering's law. Indeed, very rarely do I see, for instance, in a patient with chronic polyarthritis, the symptoms disappearing from the head first and then to the hands and feet. More often, the pain and other joint symptoms disappear in the reverse order of their appearance, even if it is from below upwards. In other words, if the arthritis manifested itself, as it happens at times, first in the knees and then in the ankles, the ankles would get better before the knees.
 Or in a patient affected by a complex of essentially functional complaints such as fatigue, anxiety, irritability, difficult digestion, joint pain and acne, rarely would I see the disappearance of the emotional disturbance first, then the poor digestion followed by the joint pain and lastly the acne. With thesimillimum most symptoms begin to improve simultaneously and disappear in the reverse order of their appearance, and not necessarily from above downwards and from inside outwards. In fact it is not uncommon that in such cases the acne, the last to have appeared, would disappear readily and the emotional state (the oldest symptom) would be the last to completely disappear.
-While treating a patient with an acute febrile disease that had progressed in the first stage from chills to fever, then to perspiration and lastly to weakness, I would observe a rapid and gentle recovery butwithout the patient re-experiencing the perspiration, then the fever and lastly the chills. While recovering from acute diseases under homeopathic treatment, the patient does not re-experience the original symptoms one by one in the reverse order of their appearance. Many more troublesome exceptions similar to the above could be cited.
+While treating a patient with an acute febrile disease that had progressed in the first stage from chills to fever, then to perspiration and lastly to weakness, I would observe a rapid and gentle recovery but without the patient re-experiencing the perspiration, then the fever and lastly the chills. While recovering from acute diseases under homeopathic treatment, the patient does not re-experience the original symptoms one by one in the reverse order of their appearance. Many more troublesome exceptions similar to the above could be cited.
 ==== What was wrong with Hering's law as quoted above from Kent's Lectures on Homeopathic Philosophy? Had I misunderstood the law? ====
-According to Webster's dictionary, a law is defined as a sequence of events that occurs with unvaryinguniformity whereas a rule permits exceptions, and a dogma rests on opinion. Was this lack of confirmation of the said law due to "suppressive" homeopathic treatment as suggested by a number of theoretical and perhaps dogmatic homeopaths? If so, why have these so called "purists" not stood up and proven that all their cured cases followed the said law? To my knowledge this proof has not been forthcoming.
+According to Webster's dictionary, a law is defined as a sequence of events that occurs with unvarying uniformity, whereas a rule permits exceptions, and a dogma rests on opinion. Was this lack of confirmation of the said law due to "suppressive" homeopathic treatment, as suggested by a number of theoretical and perhaps dogmatic homeopaths? If so, why have these so called "purists" not stood up and proven that all their cured cases followed the said law? To my knowledge, this proof has not been forthcoming.
 ==== Was I the only practitioner in this position? ====
-I questioned teachers and colleagues, some with many years of experience. Few could answer my questions and none has been able to substantiate from their own experience without the shadow of a doubt that Hering's law was a true law of nature. It seems that most were in the same situation as me, even the supposed authorities would discuss the matter but in private with the author. It seems that we all had classic cases of cure from above downwards, from within outwards, from more to less important organs and in the reverse order of appearance of symptoms. But these absolutely "perfect" cases were only occasional. The majority of cured cases did not fulfill all the four citedcriteria.
+I questioned teachers and colleagues, some with many years of experience. Few could answer my questions, and none has been able to substantiate from their own experience without the shadow of a doubt that Hering's law was a true law of nature. It seems that most were in the same situation as me, even the supposed authorities would discuss the matter, but in private with the author. It seems that we all had classic cases of cure from above downwards, from within outwards, from more to less important organs and in the reverse order of appearance of symptoms. But these absolutely "perfect" cases were only occasional. The majority of cured cases did not fulfill all the four cited criteria.
 ==== So I decided to go back to the sources. ====
-On one hand, neither Kent, in his Lectures on Homœopathic Philosophy of 1900, nor Stuart Close, inThe Genius of Homœopathy of 1924, nor Herbert Roberts, in The Principles and Art of Cure by Homœopathy of 1936 while discussing the above law, refer to it as Hering's law. (1-3) None of these three authors makes any reference to Hering in their lectures on the law of direction of cure. On the other hand, Garth Boericke, in A Compendium of the Principles of Homœopathy of 1929, refers to it as Hering's rule but not as a law. [(Boericke G. A compend of the Principles of Homœopathy for Students in Medicine. Philadelphia: Boericke & Tafel, 1929.)] Confusing, isn't it? Did Hering ever formulate a law on the direction of cure? If he did, why was his name not clearly associated with the law and was it as a law or a rule? Why was the literature so ambiguous?
+On one hand, neither Kent, in his Lectures on Homœopathic Philosophy of 1900, nor Stuart Close, in The Genius of Homœopathy of 1924, nor Herbert Roberts, in The Principles and Art of Cure by Homœopathy of 1936, while discussing the above law, refer to it as Hering's law. (1-3) None of these three authors makes any reference to Hering in their lectures on the law of direction of cure. On the other hand, Garth Boericke, in A Compendium of the Principles of Homœopathy of 1929, refers to it as Hering's rule, but not as a law. [(Boericke G. A compend of the Principles of Homœopathy for Students in Medicine. Philadelphia: Boericke & Tafel, 1929.)] Confusing, isn't it? Did Hering ever formulate a law on the direction of cure? If he did, why was his name not clearly associated with the law, and was it as a law or a rule? Why was the literature so ambiguous?
-At this point, I realized that the sources had to be explored further. The answers would all have to be within the literature of the nineteenth century. After a thorough examination of this literature I have so far been unable to find any of Hering's famous contemporaries and close colleagues discussing or making any reference to a law of direction of cure. Writings of Boenninghausen, Jahr, Joslin, P.P. Wells, Lippe, H.N.Guernsey, Dunham, E.A. Farrington, H.C. Allen, Nash, etc, were all silent.
+At this point, I realized that the sources had to be explored further. The answers would all have to be within the literature of the nineteenth century. After a thorough examination of this literature, I have so far been unable to find any of Hering's famous contemporaries and close colleagues discussing or making any reference to a law of direction of cure. Writings of Boenninghausen, Jahr, Joslin, P.P. Wells, Lippe, H.N.Guernsey, Dunham, E.A. Farrington, H.C. Allen, Nash, etc., were all silent.
-When Hering died in 1880, colleagues all over the world assembled to pay tribute to the great homeopath. His many accomplishments were recalled. Strangely, none made any mention of a law of direction of cure promulgated by Hering. (5) Arthur Eastman, a student who was close to Hering during the last three years of the venerable homeopath, published in 1917 Life and Reminiscences of Dr. Constantine Hering also without mentioning a law pertaining to direction of cure. (6) Calvin Knerr, Hering's son-in-law, published in 1940, 60 years after Hering's death, the Life of Hering, a compilation of biographical notes. (7) Again no mention is made of the famous law. Not only confusing, but also puzzling.
+When Hering died in 1880, colleagues all over the world assembled to pay tribute to the great homeopath. His many accomplishments were recalled. Strangely, none made any mention of a law of direction of cure promulgated by Hering. [(Raue CG, Knerr CB, Mohr C, eds. A Memorial of Constantine Hering. Philadelphia: Press of Globe Printing House, 1884.)] Arthur Eastman, a student who was close to Hering during the last three years of the venerable homeopath, published in 1917 Life and Reminiscences of Dr. Constantine Hering, also without mentioning a law pertaining to direction of cure. [(Eastman AM. Life and Reminiscences of Dr. Constantine Hering. Philadelphia: Published by the family for private circulation, 1917.)] Calvin Knerr, Hering's son-in-law, published in 1940, 60 years after Hering's death, the Life of Hering, a compilation of biographical notes. [(Knerr CB. Life of Hering. Philadelphia: The Magee Press, 1940.)] Again no mention is made of the famous law. Not only confusing, but also puzzling.
 Obviously, the sources had to be further explored. Here are the fruits of this exploration.
@@ Line 52: / Line 52: @@
 . **Hahnemann - 1828**
-In 1828, Hahnemann published his first observations and theories on chronic diseases. (8) I summarize here the points most pertinent to the present discussion:
+In 1828, Hahnemann published his first observations and theories on chronic diseases. [(Hahnemann SC. The Chronic Diseases. Trans. by LF Tafel. Philadelphia: Boericke & Tafel, 1896.)] I summarize here the points most pertinent to the present discussion:
   * "All diseases, acute and chronic of non-venereal origin, come from the original malady, called psora. (page 7)
   * "A skin eruption is the first manifestation of psora. (page 38)
-  * "The more the skin eruption spreads the more it keeps the internal manifestations of psora latent. (page 40)
+  * "The more the skin eruption spreads, the more it keeps the internal manifestations of psora latent. (page 40)
-  * "But when the skin eruption is suppressed with an external application or other influences the latent psora goes unnoticed and its internal manifestation increases. Then "it originates a legion of chronic diseases." (page 12) Incidently, for Hahnemann, a suppressed skin eruption is not driven into the body as it was popularly thought in his time, and even today by most homeopaths, but rather the vital force is compelled "to effect a transference of a worse form of morbid action to other and more important parts." (Introduction of the //Organon of Medicine// page 62) (9)
+  * "But when the skin eruption is suppressed with an external application or other influences, the latent psora goes unnoticed and its internal manifestation increases. Then "it originates a legion of chronic diseases." (page 12) Incidently, for Hahnemann, a suppressed skin eruption is not driven into the body as it was popularly thought in his time, and even today by most homeopaths, but rather the vital force is compelled "to effect a transference of a worse form of morbid action to other and more important parts." (Introduction of the //Organon of Medicine// page 62) [(Hahnemann SC. Organon of Medicine. Trans. by W Boericke. Philadelphia: Boericke & Tafel, 1920)]
-  * "Latent psora, an abnormal susceptibility to disease, will manifest itself as severe diseases after exposure to stress (or as he calls it, unfavorable conditions of life) acute infections, trauma and injuries, exhaustion from overworking, lack of fresh air or exercise, frustration, grief, poor nutrition, etc, and by "incorrect and weakening allopathic treatment". (page 48)
+  * "Latent psora, an abnormal susceptibility to disease, will manifest itself as severe diseases after exposure to stress (or as he calls it, unfavorable conditions of life) acute infections, trauma and injuries, exhaustion from overworking, lack of fresh air or exercise, frustration, grief, poor nutrition, etc., and by "incorrect and weakening allopathic treatment". (page 48)
   * "During the treatment of //chronic diseases of non-venereal origin// with //antipsoric remedies//, the last symptoms are always the first to disappear, "but the oldest ailments and those which have been most //constant and unchanged//, among which are the local ailments, are the last to give way." (page 135)
-  * "//If// old symptoms return during an antipsoric treatment, it means that the remedy is affecting psora at its roots and will do much for its thorough cure (page 135). If a skin eruption appears during the treatment while all other symptoms have so far improved the end of the treatment is close."
+  * "//If// old symptoms return during an antipsoric treatment, it means that the remedy is affecting psora at its roots and will do much for its thorough cure (page 135). If a skin eruption appears during the treatment, while all other symptoms have so far improved, the end of the treatment is close."
 . **Hahnemann - 1833-43**
-In paragraphs 161 and 248 of the fifth and sixth edition of the //Organon of Medicine// of 1833 and 1843 respectively, Hahnemann says that in the treatment of old and very old chronic disease, aggravation of the original disease does not appear if the remedy is accurately chosen and given in the appropriate small doses, which are only gradually increased. "When this is done, these exacerbations of the original symptoms of the chronic disease can appear only at the end of the treatment, when the cure is complete or nearly complete." The original symptoms of a chronic disease should be the last to aggravate or become more prominent before disappearing. (10)
+In paragraphs 161 and 248 of the fifth and sixth edition of the //Organon of Medicine// of 1833 and 1843 respectively, Hahnemann says that in the treatment of old and very old chronic disease, aggravation of the original disease does not appear if the remedy is accurately chosen and given in the appropriate small doses, which are only gradually increased. "When this is done, these exacerbations of the original symptoms of the chronic disease can appear only at the end of the treatment, when the cure is complete or nearly complete." The original symptoms of a chronic disease should be the last to aggravate or become more prominent before disappearing. [(Hahnemann SC. Organon of Medicine. Trans. by J Kunzli. Los Angeles: J.P. Tarcher, 1982.)]
 In paragraph 253 of the same work, the author states that in all diseases, especially in quickly arising (acute) ones, of all the signs that indicate a small beginning of improvement (or aggravation) that is not visible to everybody, the psychic condition of the patient and his general demeanor are the most certain and revealing.
@@ Line 81: / Line 81: @@
   * "The thorough cure of a widely ramified chronic disease in the organism is indicated by the most important organs being first relieved; the affection passes off //in the order in which the organs had been affected//, the more important being relieved first, the less important next, and the skin last. (page 7)
   * "Even the superficial observer will not fail in recognising this //law of order//.
-  * "This law of order which we have pointed out above, accounts for numerous cutaneous eruptions consequent upon homœopathic treatment, even where they never had been seen before; it accounts for the obstinacy with which many kinds of herpes and ulcers remain upon the skin, whereas others are dissipated like snow. Those which remain, do remain because the internal disease is yet existing... It lastly accounts for one cutaneous affection being substituted for another." (11) (page 8)
+  * "This law of order which we have pointed out above, accounts for numerous cutaneous eruptions consequent upon homœopathic treatment, even where they never had been seen before; it accounts for the obstinacy with which many kinds of herpes and ulcers remain upon the skin, whereas others are dissipated like snow. Those which remain, do remain because the internal disease is yet existing... It lastly accounts for one cutaneous affection being substituted for another." [(Hering C. Preface. In Hahnemann SC. The Chronic Diseases. Trans. by CJ Hempel. New-York: William Radde, 1845.)] (page 8)
-Here Hering assumes that all chronic diseases (it is likely that he is referring here to diseases of psoric origin, i.e., non-venereal) progress from less to more important organs and disappear in the reverse order. This is compatible with Hahnemann's theory that all chronic diseases of non-venereal origin manifest themselves first on the skin then internally. (Concerning the theories of Hahnemann, Hering wrote in 1836 in the first American edition of the //Organon of Medicine//: Whether the theories of Hahnemann are destined to endure a longer or a shorter space, whether they be the best or not, time only can determine; be it as it may however, it is a matter of minor importance. For myself, I am generally considered as a disciple and adherent of Hahnemann, and I do indeed declare, that I am one among the most enthusiastic in doing homage to his greatness; but nevertheless I declare also, that since my first acquaintance with homeopathy, (in the year 1821), down to the present day, I hve never yet accepted a single theory in the Organon as it is promulgated. I feel no aversion to acknowledge this even to the venerable sage himself. It is the genuine Hahnemannean spirit totally to disregard all theories, even those of one's own fabrication, when they are in opposition to the results of pure experience. All thoeries and hypotheses have no positive weight whatever, only so far as they lead to new experiments, and afford a better survey of the results of those already made. (page 17) (12)
+Here Hering assumes that all chronic diseases (it is likely that he is referring here to diseases of psoric origin, i.e., non-venereal) progress from less to more important organs and disappear in the reverse order. This is compatible with Hahnemann's theory that all chronic diseases of non-venereal origin manifest themselves first on the skin then internally. (Concerning the theories of Hahnemann, Hering wrote in 1836 in the first American edition of the //Organon of Medicine//: Whether the theories of Hahnemann are destined to endure a longer or a shorter space, whether they be the best or not, time only can determine; be it as it may however, it is a matter of minor importance. For myself, I am generally considered as a disciple and adherent of Hahnemann, and I do indeed declare, that I am one among the most enthusiastic in doing homage to his greatness; but nevertheless I declare also, that since my first acquaintance with homeopathy, (in the year 1821), down to the present day, I hve never yet accepted a single theory in the Organon as it is promulgated. I feel no aversion to acknowledge this even to the venerable sage himself. It is the genuine Hahnemannean spirit totally to disregard all theories, even those of one's own fabrication, when they are in opposition to the results of pure experience. All thoeries and hypotheses have no positive weight whatever, only so far as they lead to new experiments, and afford a better survey of the results of those already made. (page 17) [(Hering C. Preface to the first American edition. In the Organon of Homœopathic Medicine. New-York: William Radde, 1836.)]
 . **Hering - 1865**
@@ Line 91: / Line 91: @@
   * "The quintessence of Hahnemann's doctrine is, to give in all chronic diseases, i.e., such as progress from without inwardly, from the less essential parts of our body to the more essential, from the periphery to the central organs, //generally// from below upwards - to give in all such cases, by preference, such drugs as are opposite in their direction, or way of action, such as act from within outward, from up downward, from the most essential organs to the less essential, from the brain and the nerves outward and down to the most outward and the lowest of all organs, to the skin... All the antipsoric drugs of Hahnemann have this peculiarity as the most characteristic; the evolution of their effects from within towards without. (page 6-7)
   * "Hahnemann states, in his treatise on Chronic Diseases, American translation p.171: Symptoms recently developed are the first to yield. Older symptoms disappear last. Here we have one of //Hahnemann's general observations//, which like all of them, is of endless value, //a plain, practical rule// and of immense importance.
-  * "The above //rule// might also be expressed in the following words: In diseases of long standing, where the symptoms or groups of symptoms have befallen the sick in a certain order, succeeding each other, more and more being added from time to time to those already existing, in such cases this order should be reversed during the cure; the last //ought// to disappear first and the first last." (page 7-8) (13)
+  * "The above //rule// might also be expressed in the following words: In diseases of long standing, where the symptoms or groups of symptoms have befallen the sick in a certain order, succeeding each other, more and more being added from time to time to those already existing, in such cases this order should be reversed during the cure; the last //ought// to disappear first and the first last." (page 7-8) [(Hering C. Hahnemann's Three Rules Concerning the Rank of Symptoms. Hahnemannian Monthly 1865;1:5-12.)]
 It is very clear here that Hering makes no mention of a law but rather //of a rule//, that the symptoms //ought// to disappear in the reverse order of their appearance during the homeopathic treatment of patients with //chronic disease of psoric origin//, the ones that progress from without inwardly, from less important to more important organs and //generally// from below upwards.
@@ Line 97: / Line 97: @@
 . **Hering - 1875**
-In 1875, Hering published the first volume of //Analytical Therapeutics of the Mind// in which he stated that "//only// such patients remain well and are really cured, who have been rid of their symptoms in the reverse order of their development". (page 24) (14) Here Hering makes no mention of the three other propositions regarding the direction of cure: from above downwards, from within outwards and from the more important to the less important organs. Why? Were they not considered as important to evaluate the direction of cure as stated in previous years?
+In 1875, Hering published the first volume of //Analytical Therapeutics of the Mind//, in which he stated that "//only// such patients remain well and are really cured, who have been rid of their symptoms in the reverse order of their development". (page 24) [(Hering C. Analytical Therapeutics of the Mind. Vol 1. Philadelphia: Boericke & Tafel, 1875.)] Here Hering makes no mention of the three other propositions regarding the direction of cure: from above downwards, from within outwards and from the more important to the less important organs. Why? Were they not considered as important to evaluate the direction of cure as stated in previous years?
-In the same work, Hering also explains that he adopted Hahnemann's arrangement of the materia medica: "First inner symptoms, then outer ones. This order we have now uniformly preserved throughout the whole work." (page 21) In explaining //why// he adopted this arrangement he says: "The arrangement as well as the style of printing, has the one object especially in view, viz.: to make it as easy as possible for the eye, and through the eye, for the mind to find what is looked for." He makes no mention of this arrangement corresponding to a direction of cure, as it has been suggested by some well wishing homeopaths.
+In the same work, Hering also explains that he adopted Hahnemann's arrangement of the materia medica: "First inner symptoms, then outer ones. This order we have now uniformly preserved throughout the whole work." (page 21) In explaining //why// he adopted this arrangement, he says: "The arrangement as well as the style of printing, has the one object especially in view, viz.: to make it as easy as possible for the eye, and through the eye, for the mind to find what is looked for." He makes no mention of this arrangement corresponding to a direction of cure, as it has been suggested by some well wishing homeopaths.
@@ Line 107: / Line 107: @@
   * "Hering first introduced the law of direction of symptoms: from within out, from above downward, in reverse order of their appearance. It does not occur in Hahnemann's writings. //It is spoken of as Hering's law.// There is scarcely anything of this law in the literature of homœopathy, except the observation of symptoms going from above to the extremities, eruptions appearing on the skin and discharges from the mucous membranes or ulcers appearing upon the legs as internal symptoms disappear.
-  * "There is //non-specific assertion// in the literature except as given in the lectures on philosophy at the Post- Graduate School." (15)
+  * "There is //non-specific assertion// in the literature except as given in the lectures on philosophy at the Post- Graduate School." [(Kent JT. Correspondence of Organs, and Direction of Cure. Trans Soc. Homœopathicians 1911;1:31-33.)]
-It is reasonable to assume that Kent was the one that officialized the term "Hering's law" and so inadvertently popularized the concept of the existence of a clear and precise law of direction of cure. (At least up till 1899, at Kent's Post-Graduate School of Homeopathics, the directions of cure were still called "the //Three Directions of cure// [given by Hahnemann].) (16) By using the name of Hering it is reasonable to say that Kent thus created false and misleading historical assumptions. Since H.C. Allen had died two years previously (1909), the profession, at least in North America, had no other leaders capable to refute Kent and defend the classic Hahnemannian tradition. (It is to be remembered that in 1908 H.C. Allen had severely criticized the materia medica of the new synthetic remedies that Kent had been publishing since 1904 in //The Critique//. Kent was at the time the associate editor of this journal in which, almost monthly, he had been publishing the materia medica of a new synthetic remedy, each of very questionable value. During an open session at the annual meeting of the International Hahnemannian Association, Allen and G.P. Waring accused Kent of publishing materia medica that was "without proving or any clinical experience", which would have been completely contrary to the strict inductive method intrinsic to homeopathy. (17)
+It is reasonable to assume that Kent was the one that officialized the term "Hering's law" and so inadvertently popularized the concept of the existence of a clear and precise law of direction of cure. (At least up till 1899, at Kent's Post-Graduate School of Homeopathics, the directions of cure were still called "the //Three Directions of cure// [given by Hahnemann].) [(Loos JC. Homœopathic Catechism. Journal of Homœopathics 1898-1899;2:480-488.)] By using the name of Hering it is reasonable to say that Kent thus created false and misleading historical assumptions. Since H.C. Allen had died two years previously (1909), the profession, at least in North America, had no other leaders capable to refute Kent and defend the classic Hahnemannian tradition. (It is to be remembered that in 1908 H.C. Allen had severely criticized the materia medica of the new synthetic remedies that Kent had been publishing since 1904 in //The Critique//. Kent was at the time the associate editor of this journal in which, almost monthly, he had been publishing the materia medica of a new synthetic remedy, each of very questionable value. During an open session at the annual meeting of the International Hahnemannian Association, Allen and G.P. Waring accused Kent of publishing materia medica that was "without proving or any clinical experience", which would have been completely contrary to the strict inductive method intrinsic to homeopathy. [(Mastin JM. Editorial. Critique 1908;15:277-278.)]
-Kent then stopped permanently the publication of these synthetic remedies, even the ones that he had previously promised for upcoming publication in //The Critique//. (18) Although Kent continued to publish regularly in //The Critique// until 1911 he restricted his articles to reporting clinical cases rather than materia medica. Never was a synthetic remedy ever published by Kent after the initial criticism of Allen even in his own journal, //The Homœopathician//, that he founded in 1912. Furthermore, when Kent published the second edition of his //Lectures on Homœopathic Materia Medica// in 1912 [the first edition was in 1904], all the synthetic remedies published between 1904 and 1908 were omitted.)
+Kent then stopped permanently the publication of these synthetic remedies, even the ones that he had previously promised for upcoming publication in //The Critique//. [(Mastin JM. Editorial. Critique 1907;14:228-229.)] Although Kent continued to publish regularly in //The Critique// until 1911 he restricted his articles to reporting clinical cases rather than materia medica. Never was a synthetic remedy ever published by Kent after the initial criticism of Allen even in his own journal, //The Homœopathician//, that he founded in 1912. Furthermore, when Kent published the second edition of his //Lectures on Homœopathic Materia Medica// in 1912 [the first edition was in 1904], all the synthetic remedies published between 1904 and 1908 were omitted.)
 In this same article, Kent says that in the course of treatment of a patient suffering with a psychic disease of the will (problems of affections, grief, anger, jealousy, etc), the heart or liver will be affected as the treatment progresses.
@@ Line 144: / Line 144: @@
 Probably by the end of my career, homeopathy will have become widely accepted. I would then resent it if a group of objective scientists clinically investigate the principles of homeopathy, and find numerous exceptions not abiding to our idealistic or dogmatic conception of Hering's law; thus rendering it only "//a plain, practical rule//". I would similarly resent having a group of scientists saying that for the last hundred or more years the homeopathic profession has been blindly erring in assuming that Hering's law was an irrefutable fact.
-Five of the many plagues that have hindered the growth of homeopathy are ignorance, egotism, dogmatism, idolatry and the diversion from the inductive method. In his last address to the profession in an article published in the August 1880 (Hering died on July 23, 1880.) issue of the //North American Journal of Homœopathy//, Hering warned us that "if our school ever gives up the strict inductive method of Hahnemann we are lost, and deserve to be mentioned only as a caricature in the history of medicine." (19) Indeed, since its early beginning the tendency to rationalize the practice of medicine has also constantly threatened homeopathy. Hahnemann, who had a thorough understanding of the history of medicine, knew that the only sure way was based on the experimental method. Hering demonstrated the same rigor. Unfortunatively, we can not say the same of Kent. Let us now start carefully observing and reporting any facts that would help to perfect Hahnemann's original observations. If a direction of cure can be expressed within the context of a law, then so be it. But until demonstrated otherwise, it should remain "a plain, practical rule". The law that we suspect still needs to be rightly formulated.
+Five of the many plagues that have hindered the growth of homeopathy are ignorance, egotism, dogmatism, idolatry and the diversion from the inductive method. In his last address to the profession in an article published in the August 1880 (Hering died on July 23, 1880.) issue of the //North American Journal of Homœopathy//, Hering warned us that "if our school ever gives up the strict inductive method of Hahnemann we are lost, and deserve to be mentioned only as a caricature in the history of medicine." [(Hering C. Apis. North American Journal of Homœopathy 1880;29:29-35.)] Indeed, since its early beginning the tendency to rationalize the practice of medicine has also constantly threatened homeopathy. Hahnemann, who had a thorough understanding of the history of medicine, knew that the only sure way was based on the experimental method. Hering demonstrated the same rigor. Unfortunatively, we can not say the same of Kent. Let us now start carefully observing and reporting any facts that would help to perfect Hahnemann's original observations. If a direction of cure can be expressed within the context of a law, then so be it. But until demonstrated otherwise, it should remain "a plain, practical rule". The law that we suspect still needs to be rightly formulated.
 At present it seems appropriate to refer to these observations as the rules of the direction of cure. To refer to these as Hahnemann's or Hering's rules may further prolong the confusion. From my personal experience, it appears that the four rules are not applicable to all cases and that there is a hierarchy among them, i.e., they do not have equal value. The first indication that a disease is being cured under homeopathic treatment is that the presenting and reversible (Many symptoms related to irreversible lesions can not be expected to totally disappear; consequently the more a symptom is related to organic changes, the less likely, or more slowly it will disappear. The greater the irreversibility of the pathology the greater the symptoms will linger. The practitioner can easily be confused by these important exceptions, which are often not well perceived. Therefore this rule [of symptoms disappearing in the reverse order of appearance] is generally less applicable to symptoms deriving from organic lesions.) symptoms of the disease will disappear in the reverse order of their appearance.
@@ Line 163: / Line 163: @@
   * "It has been my rule through life never to accept anything as true, unless it came as near mathematical proof as possible in its domain of science; and, in the other hand, never to reject anything as false, unless there was stronger proof of its falsity.
-  * "Some will say, "but so many things - a majority of all observations - will thus remain between the two undecided." So they will; and can it be helped? It can, but only by accumulating most careful observations and contributing them to the general fund of knowledge." (20)
+  * "Some will say, "but so many things - a majority of all observations - will thus remain between the two undecided." So they will; and can it be helped? It can, but only by accumulating most careful observations and contributing them to the general fund of knowledge." [(Hering C. The Guiding Symptoms of our Materia Medica. Vol 1. Philadelphia: The American Publishing Society, 1879.)]
 And finally he wrote in 1845 in the preface of Hahnemann's Chronic Diseases:
-  * "It is the duty of all of us to go farther in the theory and practice of Homœopathy than Hahnemann has done. We ought to seek the truth which is before us and forsake the errors of the past." (page 9) (11)
+  * "It is the duty of all of us to go farther in the theory and practice of Homœopathy than Hahnemann has done. We ought to seek the truth which is before us and forsake the errors of the past." (page 9) [(Hering C. Preface. In Hahnemann SC. The Chronic Diseases. Trans. by CJ Hempel. New-York: William Radde, 1845.)]

Legatum Homeopathicum

User Tools

Site Tools

Differences

Page Tools