|
Accuracy and efficiency in homoeopathic therapeutics
is only possible to those who have a clearly defined idea of the
field in which the principle of Similia is operative.
The scope of homoeopathy is a subject, which
has received too little consideration by teachers and practitioners
alike. Hazy and confused ideas prevail. As a result we find on the
one hand a few sincere but misguided enthusiasts attempting the
impossible and bringing ridicule upon themselves, and on the other
hand, the great majority, ignorant of the higher possibilities,
missing their opportunities and bringing discredit upon themselves
and their art by resorting to unhomoeopathic measures in cases which
could readily be cure by homoeopathic remedies. One believes too
much, the other too little. Neither one knows why he succeeds in
one case and fails in another.
Haphazard cures do not justify boasting. The
art of pharmaco-therapeutics in general, and of homoeopathy in particular,
is not advanced by such work. What we need is clean-cut, scientific
work; work capable of being rationally explained and verified; results
attained by the intelligent application of a definite principle
and a perfected technic in a sharply delimited field.
The therapeutic principle is known; the technic
of prescribing has been developed; a large number of remedies have
been prepared; but the field of action has not been clearly defined.
In this respect we are like an army which is
wasting much good ammunition trying to search out a hidden enemy
of whose exact location it is ignorant.
A philosophical aeroplane, sent into the upper
regions of the air, may be able to locate the enemy exactly and
enable us to train our guns directly upon him.
Homoeopathy as a therapeutic method is concerned
primarily only with the morbid vital processes in the living organism,
which are perceptibly represented by the symptoms, irrespective
of what caused them.
In defining the scope of Homoeopathy it is necessary
first to discriminate between disease per se, as a Morbid vital
process and the material results or products in which the morbid
process ultimates. With the later, homoeopathy primarily has nothing
to do. It is concerned only with disease per se, in its primary,
functional or dynamical aspect.
Disease per se, Hahnemann says, is nothing
more than an alteration in the state of health of a healthy individual,
caused by a dynamic action of external, inimical forces upon the
life principle of the living organism, making it self known only
by perceptible signs and symptoms, the totality of which represents
and for all practical purposes constitutes the disease.
It becomes necessary therefore, in homoeopathic
prescribing to carefully separate the primary, functional symptoms,
which represent the morbid process itself, from the secondary symptoms,
which represent the pathological end products of the disease.
The gross, tangible lesions and product in which
disease ultimates are not the primary object of homoeopathic prescription.
We do not prescribe for the tumor, which affects the patient, nor
are we guided by the secondary symptoms, which arise from the mere
physical presence of the tumor: we prescribe for the patient ---selecting
and being guided by the symptoms which represent the morbid, vital
process which preceded, accompanied and ultimated in the development
of the tumor.
If there is doubt as to which symptoms are primary
and which are secondary the history will decide. In the evolution
of disease in the living organism, functional changes precede organic
or structural changes. Function creates the organ,is
a maxim in biological and morphological science, from which it follows
that function reveals the condition of the organ.
The order in which the symptoms of a case appear,
therefore, enables us to determine which are primary and which secondary,
as well as to ascribe reflex symptoms to their source and correctly
localize the disease.
For the homoeopathic practioner the totality
of the functional symptoms of the patient is the disease, in the
sense that such symptoms constitutes the only perceptible form of
the disease and are the only rational basis of curative treatment.
Symptoms are the outwardly perceptible signs or phenomena of internal
morbid changes in the state of the previously healthy organism,
and are our only means of knowing what disease is. They represent
a change from a state of order to a state of disorder. When the
symptoms are removed the disease ceases to exist.
These phenomena result from and represent the
action upon the living organism of some external agent or influence
inimical to life. With the morbific agents themselves homoeopathy
primarily has no more to do than it has with the tangible products
or ultimates of disease. It is taken for granted that the physician,
acting in another capacity than that of a prescriber of homoeopathic
medicine, will remove the causes of the disease and the obstacles
to cure as for as possible before he addresses himself to the task
of selecting and administering the remedy which is homoeopathic
to the symptoms of the case, by which the cure is to be performed.
|