Posted by: homeoluv
Why should we isolate pathological tissue dhanges from the whole disease picture? Man does not mean only his mind or intellect.The physical body is a part of him. It is not an attachment or appendage to him.Kent may have derived such notions from philosophy. Should we blindly follow him?Assigning different grades of importance in the hierarchy of symptoms is allright. But to ignore pathlogical changes as useless may not be factually incorrect.
I agree totally. But I don’t think kent or anyone ever said just ignore the pathology altogether. (ok..ok..some modern gurs do say so!) The kind of pathology a person develops also reflects his/her individuality. The only reason to ignore such pathology can be that we did not get those pathological affinities through provings. But as I have said in my previous answer, preference should be given to a medicine which covers both the totality of symptoms and the pathology (pathology is also a part of totality, albiet – less useful), then to the medicine which covers the general totality only, and then to medicines which cover thr totality partially but have known tissue affinity.
Leave a Comment