|
| |||||||||||
| ||||||||||||
Forums
Courses
Shop
Diseases
Articles
Journal
Directory|
|
||||
Homeopathic Archives |
||||
|
|
||||
|
The Elasticity of the Law of Homeopathy -- E. A. Farrington |
||||
|
TRUTH is not narrow and restricted, it is broad and, in its own sphere, universal. It manifests itself in degrees, from a most superficial presentation to the most profound comprehension. One thing, however, is requisite, its essential qualities must obtain, or it is proportionately defective or even destroyed. So with the law of Homeopathy. In its sphere it is universal, in its acceptance it appears in all shades, from the crudest practice to the most skilful efforts of a Hahnemann. Still there is a sina qua non-, which is that there shall, somewhere, be a similarity between disease and drug. Gradations in this law are not only such as may be expressed by the relative degree of fullness of acceptance_ _ gradations comparable with the continuous fading of light from the brilliant center to the boundary between light and darkness. Gradations in the law are also such as are expressed discretely, like the rounds of a ladder that represent distinct, progressive steps. Two or three of these latter degrees are so clearly defined that I purpose considering them for a few moments in their bearing upon theme. Physicians, who depend solely or chiefly upon so-called pathological indications in selecting a drug, are certainly within the province of Homeopathy, because they are, in a way, applying its law. They are seeking for fixed and definite similarities between drug and disease. They are mounted on one round of the ladder of true medicine. Physicians who depend solely or chiefly upon so-called nutritive remedies are doubtless, within the pale of Homeopathy, for they are after a fashion applying its law. They seek the similar from among drugs that in normal quantities act physiologically, and in abnormal amount cause disease similar, in some features, to their known pathogenetic effects. They, too, are mounted on a round of the same ladder. Physicians who depend solely or chiefly upon the organon in prescribing are unquestionably within the domain of homeopathy, for their aim is to discover what may be aptly termed the similimum. They are making the nicest possible application of the law of similars. They, necessarily, are mounted on a road of the ladder of the genuine medicine. But what are the essential difference in these three gradations that mark them as discrete? And which of them is the highest round, nearest to the fountain of truth? Let us see. All three classes claim that they take the “ totality of symptoms” from which the desired remedy is to be deduced. But they differ severally in the method of deduction. One picks out as characteristic the pathological changes, another, nutritive changes, the third “ the more prominent, un-common and peculiar features of the case.” The first two rely mainly upon objective changes, the third upon subjective as well as objective. These essential distinctions characterize the three classes respectively when they, for one reason or another, step from their own round up or down on to another. If the pathologist gives any weight to a mental symptom, or to a drug effect he calls ‘ contingent’, it is always held in subordination to the pathological lesions, it is always with the reservation that the later must be subservient to what he terms characteristics. And this brings me to my second question: which of these is on the highest round? |
||||
| -- Next --> | ||||
|
||||
