Apropo to several of the previously posted threads, please read Andre Saine's talk which he gave at the NCH summer school. It's posted on the Baltimore Homeopathic Study Group website. http://baltimore-homeopathy.org/saine3.html

Also, his original article from which he took the talk is on his website at http://www.homeopathy.ca/articles/sp...-medicine.html

[ 27. June 2003, 14:31: Message edited by: sreischman ]

__________________
Shirley Reischman

Have you also read what Andre Saine thinks about LM / Q potencies? They seem to fall into the category of Hahnemann's speculative thinking!

I think that's very, very funny.

__________________
...and deliverance has many faces<br />but grace<br />is an aquaintance of mine

Dear Members
Interesting interview and article.
Name-bashing does not reveal the true homeopathy. To explain and show through cases what homeopathy is, is much more effective. The reader then can see for him/ herself.
With the rest of the interview, we will know more, once the book about Lippe is published.

__________________
Hans Weitbrecht
Consultant Homeopath

Here's what Andre Saine said in reference to LM's, Hahnemann, etc., in a 2 / 01 Links interview:

"When we study Hahnemann as a person as well as a scientist, we soon find out that he tended to be very dogmatic in his writings by rendering his last experiment as the ultimate way. This approach of his is contrary to the great scientific mind he had. When we read his works in a chronological order, at each step of its evolution he impresses upon the reader that the method has now been developed to absolute perfection and, that is it. Period. Then comes the next work, and now he tells us that further experiments are now permitting him to negate what he has previously said with so great certainty and that the method has now reached a new state of perfection, and so on. If we read any work of Hahnemann, including the sixth edition of the Organon, we may ourselves get stuck in his dogmatism and not go beyond the last work just read.

Wouldn't we be fools to learn from his mistakes? In my mind, the real Hahnemannian is not the one that does as Hahnemann said to do but the one who proceeds with the positive aspect of his approach, the inductive method. That is the real Hahnemannian, not a follower, but one who understands."

David, thank you for that input.

You know, most extremely good, old, "Hahnemanian" practitioners in India still use the 5th Edition as their guideline.
They believe that there were so many drastic changes in the 6th edition, where HAhnemann even contradicted what he said earlier that its autheticity is questionable. They believe it was tampered with while it took so long to get published - mainly by Madame Melanie.

SO I wonder if its possible to properly authenticate the 6th edition.

thanks again,
Leela

[ 28. June 2003, 05:39: Message edited by: doctorleela ]

__________________
http://www.homeopathy2health.com

You don't have to say anything, Dr. Leela. I can read your mind.

HEy Carol,
Give me a break! You can read my mind!!
Well I said it now.

__________________
http://www.homeopathy2health.com

...and you'll need to clear out your private message inbox. Its not accepting any replies.

__________________
http://www.homeopathy2health.com

Here's a sentence highlighted in Andre Saine's Links interview:

"I would think that we would do greater honour to Hahnemann by further developing homeopathy, and medicine in general, through understanding and adopting the inductive method, which is the basis for his achievements, rather than adopting his dogmatism and repeating his mistakes."