Dorothy Gardner:

You asked me a question within the thread from Orka, re: how to analyze a homeopathic constitutional type. I thought it best to begin a new post in reply.

The situation of Orka's associate/friend here on this message board is an excellent example of the method I use in determining a person's homeopathic constitutional type. If you re-read through the posts of that thread, you can pick up the rythym of the process.

But first, I would recommend you read and study (print out, if possible, so you can refer to it all the time) an excellent selection from the writings of Kent that is provided free on this website. It is an excellent summary of the method I use in my own homeopathic work. It is, as Kent says, a combination of "art and science". As intimidating as that might sound, it is not!! Any person (even those people brandnew to the study of homeopathy) who starts off in this right way by following/learning this method, is going to grow rapidly in the truest understanding of homeopathy. (To find the exerpt: Go to the Homepage of this website. There you will see "Lesser Writings by Kent". Click on that. A page will pop up that has numbered entries. Click on "18...Use of the Repertory". There you will find Kent's great and wise advice on how to proceed with the information you have gathered during taking the person's profile.)

After you read through and study Kent's information, go back to the "Orka" thread here on this discussion bulletin board, and use Kent's outline to follow how I arrived at and validated the woman's constitutional type. Please then post any further questions you may have, including providing your analysis of your own sitution. If you would like to work on your personal analysis here on this message board, I will try to guide you by validating or correcting your conclusions as you go along.

The most important thing to remember is that the Mental Summary is to stay your firm (repeat: firm) basis for the whole analysis. As Kent says, you begin by studying the aversions/hates, and the loves/desires, and the entire mental profile (I sometimes call this disposition/behavior/"personality"=the modern word for this/or, basically, the way the person approaches the world and his or her surroundings, in particular his or her interrelationships to other people, but it also includes the whole mental sphere of symptoms such as memory etc, etc). You always stick to this as your primary guide. Do NOT include anything that is not part of this mental summary of information.

Or, to put it another way; inotherwords: Kent says,
"There is no need of writing out the remedies not in the mental group or summary; these symptoms, relating to the whole patient, cannot be omitted with any hope of success." For example, you cannot prescribe based on the color of the tongue, or the type of stool, or the fact that a sore throat is better by such-and-such, etc, etc. This sort of juggling of individual physicals will only lead to utter confusion. The only time you would use the various individual physicals that your case-taking has gathered is at the very very moment when you have decided on your remedy and want to confirm. Even then, many polycrests have so broad a range that they can indeed encompass just about any physical complaint and its particular modality (though the remedies' complete ranges are NOT listed in the materia medicas)!! This is why you do NOT make a remedy selection based on the individual physical complaint. You must stick with the information that affects the person as a whole.

Much confusion, and wrong prescribing ALWAYS occur if you get bogged down with the individual physicals or anything that does not apply to the person AS A WHOLE (exception: peculiar symptoms)!!

Anyway, let me know what you find after the readings!!

Kents writings: http:\\www.simillimum.com
Artikles regarding Kent contra Hahnemann.
Kent is not supported in all his doings.
Organon:§82>121.

PS. What applyes to the person, is not the observers interpreted delutions, taken from populistic writings.
In this way, those followers, make a big hole in whole.
Every one who know the laws of observation knows this fact, its called range of vision, field of vision, if standing in a circle, looking forward, do you see 360 deg? No, you only see a small parts, and that part becomes lesser if your vision is obscured, or somthing blocks your wiew.
The whole of the patient then, is related to the limitations of the one who see.
Never belive blindly, put it all to the test!

Ricky,

As you probably are already aware, this info is a very interesting BEGINNING of ascertaining this child's disposition, but not nearly enough to make a decision on her constitutional type.

As for what rubric you would use in a repertory...

I suggested to Dorothy that she read Kent's particular writing that is entitled "Use of Repertory"...but in my opinion, the info he writes about is really the method to use in determining a person's constitutional type. I would have titled the piece "How to determine constitutional type" or "How to use the materia medica", and NOT "How to use the repertory". The repertory is merely an effort to reduce the materia medicas down into alphabetical rubrics representing symptoms. The idea is to use the repertory to lead one to the correct remedy in the materia medica.

In the situation of the child you refer to, I would start by thinking about the symptoms or the picture you have presented so far and asking what remedy pictures it sounds like. This requires, of course, a basic understanding of the mental pictures of many different remedies. This is why you start by studying the remedies in the materia medicas FIRST.

You ask yourself what remedies have "teasing others" as keynotes, what remedies have "run to room if teased", and on and on. That is the beginning. Now, in the event you don't know the various remedies' characters well enough yet to know some remedy possibilities already, you open the repertory and read through the WHOLE ENTIRE mental section and look for all those rubrics that seem to match. You look at all the remedies listed under each rubric and then go to the materia medica and read through and study them...

So, I am sorry because it seems you want me to give you a list of rubrics for this child you are studying, but I don't work initially with the rubrics, but rather with materia medicas and my own knowledge base. That is the basis of drawing the big picture. Too much reliance on the repertory is frustrating and misleading. This is why I suggested to Dorothy to do the reading and then look at the way I analyzed Orka's posts.

About Tuberculinum: Others (not me) have been often making suggestions of Tub for various children on this message board. Time to study Tub's whole picture!! Especially one of Tub leading keynotes: tendency towards PHYSICAL violence towards others, often of a malicious variety (meaning, unprovoked violence). The typical Tub child is likely to hit anyone who teases him or her, rather than run away to the room and cry. Another BIG keynote for Tub: GREAT need for variety; child goes from toy to toy, from person to person, etc etc. And so on... In other words, you should not jump from one or two mental "symptoms" to determining the possible remedy. No way.

The best suggestion I can give you, other then for what I've already said to Dorothy, is for you to pick up a manageable materia medica, like Boericke, and start reading it cover to cover. When complete, start over again. Also, try to take notes and reduce each remedy to its mental picture (most important) and keynotes. Add to your store of information other writers' understanding of the remedies, and so on, until you can readily bring to your mind each remedy with its unique set of characteristics. This process happens over much time, but is well worth the effort for acurrate homeopathic prescribing.

[This message has been edited by kevin seymour (edited 28 October 1999).]

Reading what you have written about mental symptoms what rubric would I use for a child who loves teasing others ( full of fun and devilment in her , says Mother) but runs off and cries to her bedroom if someone teases her!! She also thinks that none of her friends like her. The other interesting thing about her is the very hairy skin, especially her arms! Mum says she was born with a hairy spine and hairy earlobes. There were never any real temper tantrums with this child she just runs off to her room when upset and cries. Can this be Tub.?

The above was a tongue in cheek way of showing that both Physicals and Mentals are important in my eyes. I try to look at a totality. This is not a Tub. personality! I have actually finished the repertorisation of this case and have come up with Sulphur for many reasons that I did not write about above.(Ezcema, tachycardia which is audible, visible, < movement, a total disinterest in clothes in a 7 year old girl is unusual, messy, hates washing, excellent appetite, lack of fears, intelligent, excellent vocabulary etc!!)

In an unpublished work of Children's Remedies by Tony Grinney, I found "....resents outside interference but shows itself more in that they are liable to weep, any attempt to comfort them will annoy them" From Herscu I find "When they become upset they may wish to be alone and not be consoled." This may explain the running off when things don't go her way.

It is interesting that Sulphur is a Grade A Anti miasmatic remedy for tuberculinum in Choudhury's "Indication of Miasms" book. I think this child may need Tub. at sometime in her life as a Grandmother had TB. Mother also has very hairy arms and although not a patient of mine she looks very Phosphorus which is also in the same Grade A list.

I agree entirely with you about the fact that knowledge of the Materia Medica is important. It is so very rare that I take the top remedy of a repertorisation. This one did however come out 2nd. After the initial repertorisation is when the work starts in the studies of many Materia Medica to be convinced that I am giving the correct remedy.

I learnt so much from Orka's patient through you. Please find the time to carry on the good work.

First learn how to take down a case, then learn to use a repertorie like Kents, one book that gives you a idea, is Luis Betinis , symptoms in Homeopathy. Ricky knows where you can buy that.
AND THE MOST IMPORTANT YOU CAN DO, IS TO BUY A dictionary, MADE AT THE SAME TIMEPERIODE AS KENTS REPERTORIE.
The users and teachers of today, do/did not
recognize that they have iterpreted Kent, with a language that is 70 years newer, ask whom you like, all languages changes in 70 years, what ment one thing then, do not the same now, and this way, you use Kent wrong, and find not correct remedie, or lay wait on rubrics or mentals not fit for the case.

Thank you Kevin, got my glasses on and ready for a long nite of reading. Also thanks for all other imputs, every thing helps. Will get back as soon as I feel I have some answers in my mind.

------------------

Thank you VERY much for intro to Lesser Writings by Kent. I've printed out the contents, l8,56 and very interested in 25, as I had diphtheria when I was about 4-5yrs.old.in l921 living in B'klyn,New York .Will continue reading again tomorrow and will keep in touch later.

------------------

Dorothy,

Wonderful!! Will try and look for your future posts. You may want to post a brandnew thread when you begin to work on your situation. Looking forward to it.


Ricky,

Thank you very much for the compliment. I am glad you found Orka's thread interesting and useful!! I am very curious to hear from Orka again, and will update the thread today.

It is interesting how with some situations on this message board the people who are seeking assistance occasionally provide the best info for good homeopathic prescribing. Other times, there is, frustratingly, only the physicals given in an allopathic sort of way. It can take much time to elicit the best information!! Especially when it is a parent of a young child. When the adults post for themselves, we can "hear" much information "between the lines" of the actual words/sentences given!! Well, perservere, yes?!