Jacob,

I just want to know that, whether constitution or miasmatic picture of a person is based on his inherited or aquired traits/symptoms?

__________________
Homeopathic & Biochemic system existed because Drs.Hahnemann & Schuessler thought differently.
Successful people don't do different things, they do things differently..S.Kh.

Tanstar - No sweat. I didn't realise there was a heated debate about this topic on another forum....until Jacob posted about it. When I suggested earlier to search the archives -- I meant on this website! There were some heated debates about constitution within the last couple of years - right here on Otherhealth.

Jacob, I too hope that we'll all be able to maintain a level of sensibility when discussing this topic. This topic in particular, imo, is one that really needs to be investigated and explored by all us homeopaths with an open mind. Terminology within the homeopathic community, imo, should be carefully reviewed. Layers is a good example. Far too simplistic a term to really convey the complexity of meaning --- especially in the eyes of newish students. Constitution is another term which should be considered carefully -- if only to fully understand.........what exactly does it mean? How is it important to a case? How is it important to the selection of a remedy that's homeopathic to a given case? etc etc etc

I think what he means is: if 'layer' is a theory -- then how is it significant to the process of selecting a remedy that is homeopathic to a case?

Unfortunately, we don't have a consensus on some of the terminology used in homeopathy. So, the way I see it -- if someone asks me to qualify exactly what I mean (some term) --- they are simply trying to assess if we're both on the same page or not--- so to speak. Otherwise we're talking apples and oranges - and even sometimes talking at cross purposes even(!). Of course, sometimes this means a review of our understanding is in order (gulp -- been there, done that, own the flippin t-shirt).
Hans is very precise about the terminology he uses. Personally I appreciate this precision (from anyone) because it's always clear what is being said by them once I know what their understanding is of whatever terminology is being discussed. Doesn't mean we agree on everything or draw the same conclusions (even about terminology! just to confuse matters - ha) -- but at least it brings us a little closer to understanding what the heck the other person is building their thoughts on.

It'll be interesting to see if we can get a consensus on the meaning of a few terms -- and then move forward in the discussion. All hopefully on the same page.

One can hope, hey.
It's late where I am -- so perhaps I haven't put it all very well...but that's my two cents for the moment.

__________________
"The significance of a fact is measured by the capacity of the observer."
Carroll Dunham

Hesistant to join the discussion by Giants! being a novice, can I say that, constitution is a 'terrain' ? (Louis Pasteur commented during his last days- "it is the terrain that matters not the seed")

Dear members

Reading through the different explanations and evaluations reminds on previous discussions, where I have already explained in great depth and length things seen from an homeopathic view.
Defined as homeopathic view is the rules and principles laid down in the organon and the Chronic diseases. The organon’s full Title is: The ‘’organon of the healing art’’, a title rightly chosen, as it contains a lot of information on contemporary medical views of the allopathic side as well.

Asked about the significance of this discussion, I wonder -- . Isn’t it the signs and symptoms now present which form the indication for the now relevant remedy and nothing else? Isn’t the evaluation of other features ,whether they be of constitutional or of miasmatic or being part of this or that layer, whichever way one may view things speculative, the use of these systems of evaluation yet another system, of which Hahnemann warned so much against?

What significance has the classification of a disease-picture of being of Psoric, or of Syphilitic, or of Sycothic nature (leave aside the other miasms) ? Or—slicing it into layers ,assuming one disease wraps around another?

IMO: nil and nothing !!

If Sulph is indicated, then by the signs and symptoms now present. In Hahnemann’s own casebooks from the 1839 on, -- at a time the book of chronic diseases was published--, there is no mentioning in any of his cases of Psora, Sycosis, syphilis, nor of any constitution.
What is recorded is the symptoms, ths signs. and those he takes, repertorizes sometimes (SRH), and prescribes the remedies accordingly. A further point speaking for this view is, that Hahnemann did not change the instructions for what forms the indications for the right remedy before and after the discovery of the chronic miasmatis disease. G.H.G Jahr, who first wrote about relations between remedies and constitutions 1856 warns to take these relations as indications for the selection of the curative remedy.

But what are the benefits knowing Psora Syphilis and Sycosis, if there is no immediate benefit for the selection of the now necessary remedy?

IMO:

having studied these diseases by their symptoms in the CD enable One to recognize them ie. diagnose them. But Hahnemann already showed the futility of diagnosis for the remedy selection – so this alone cannot be the advantage. The real advantage is for the treatment-plan, ie, the practitioner can aware the patient of the nature of his malady, and also of the future treatment options. And this exactly what Hahnemann advises in the organon.

Many lives are lost, many cases are messed-up because irrelevant information is used to determine the remedy now needed in the false belief, that literally ALL information has to be included. Valuable time and energy is wasted in trying to analyse the BIG list of Lifetime-symptoms, moods and whims so that only a few momenta are filtered out, for which a remedy is selected, which then in turn like a miracle should cure all the other things as well. Not to mention that a good homeopath has to have the ability to imagine the patient’s basic delusion, which is the core and the essence of the picture and the real indication of the curative remedy – so many are made belief.

It is a bit like that:
A patient hit by an arrow is brought to the doctor. First the doctor needs to know, who shot the arrow, then he needs to know what was the bow like, then he needs to know where did the accident happen etc,-- The doctor would not do anything before he had all the information – and the patient die of the injury. Wouldn’t it be more appropriate to pull out the arrow?

Or that one: the patient rings while waiting in the A+E department of the hospital: She was overcome by a sudden violent frontal headache accompanied by stiffness of the neck and vomiting. It is getting progressively worse with the hour. Even movement even of the eyes makes her dizzy and the pain worse. I got the husband to give her BRY 200C immediately. The doctors were very concerned, but unable to do anything at the moment.in case there is a tumour or what’s however, and had to run a few tests and an X-ray. There diagnosis after a few hours eventually was viral meningitis, and they had little to offer, but by then the headache had eased very much, the stiff neck was gone, and the patient was fine next morning.

__________________
Hans Weitbrecht
Consultant Homeopath

Hello Jacob.

Whether those new one will be due to progress or result of inherited traits/taints or will be having no relations with those inherited traits/taints? Can one constitutional or miasmatic remedy be prescribed for one person suitable for wholeof his life?

__________________
Homeopathic & Biochemic system existed because Drs.Hahnemann & Schuessler thought differently.
Successful people don't do different things, they do things differently..S.Kh.

Pls tell me;

Whether constitution's below mentioned dict. definition matches with the homeopathic defintion of constitution?

Constitution: the physical makeup of the individual comprising inherited qualities modified by environment : the structure, composition, physical makeup, or nature of something.

How followings are synonyms or part to constitution?

Temperament: constitution of a substance, body, or organism with respect to the mixture or balance of its elements, qualities, or parts : MAKEUP b : COMPLEXION

Makeup: the way in which the parts or ingredients of something are put together : COMPOSITION : physical, mental, and moral constitution.

Complexion:
the combination of the hot, cold, moist, and dry qualities held in medieval physiology to determine the quality of a body
: an individual complex of ways of thinking or feeling : a complex of attitudes and inclinations.
: the hue or appearance of the skin and especially of the face <a dark complexion>
: overall aspect or character[character: one of the attributes or features that make up and distinguish an individual].

It is important that "inherited qualities modified by environment" may not be newly aquired qualities in this sense. Morover, constitutions may be relevant to qualities but may not with just only disordered conditions.

In scientific sense, changes in environmental effects and physical makeup/composition can be somewhat interpreted as change in temperature. In primative/archaic language sense, temperature can be somewhat explained by "COMPLEXION & TEMPERAMENT".

__________________
Homeopathic & Biochemic system existed because Drs.Hahnemann & Schuessler thought differently.
Successful people don't do different things, they do things differently..S.Kh.

It is important to note 'the genetic inheritance tempered or modified by our environment', means it is genetic inheritance tempered or modified by our environment not the aquired new ones.

I have a dynamic thought,

Every effect by inherited makeup modified by our environment of any person can be expressed by temperature of that person. Every being or thing can have its own temperature depending on its compostion or make up which may vary slightly even in same speci. In view of this, can a person's constitution be expressed by its variated current temperature or at birth?

__________________
Homeopathic & Biochemic system existed because Drs.Hahnemann & Schuessler thought differently.
Successful people don't do different things, they do things differently..S.Kh.

Jacob, I understand your point that you perceive no piece of information so irrelevant that you would dismiss it during the CASE TAKING. Fair enough -- take good notes -- have it all on hand in case something proves useful in future. However, where the crunch comes for a lot of homeopaths is when they have to decide which of the information gathered during case-taking is an actual disease symptom.

A lot of people are under the false impression that ALL the information (learned in the case taking) is relevant to the selection of a remedy (or that they must search for some central theme or core essence, etc.) INSTEAD of just looking for the signs and symptoms of disease. It might be interesting to find a theme - but a theme isn't a disease symptom - and when you boil it all down - we're looking for the presenting disease symptoms that we can put into language (locate rubrics) and then use those [rubrics] to help us find a remedy that is homeopathic to the case at hand.

Incidentally, I know Hans does not dismiss miasms - but obviously, he'd have to speak for himself on exactly how he uses that data in his work.

In the interest of clarity and learning and understanding each other as fully as possible - I hope neither of you mind my comments at this point.
Lisa

__________________
"The significance of a fact is measured by the capacity of the observer."
Carroll Dunham

Dear Members, dear Jacob

If there are advances in Homeopathy, then I really welcome them.
The weight lies on ‘’within homeopathy’’.

This predisposes, that Homeopathy is defined, before it can be advanced on.

Historically we are in a very good position, as we have the organon and the Cd
defining the rules and principle. These rules and principles define in return homeopathy.

In order to find out whether new ideas and concepts are real advances One needs to compare them with the already existing homeopathy.

I have done this with the works of Kent, Boger, lippe, Allen, just to name a few older writers.
The results were, that none of those actually advanced homeopathy. It was rather the opposite, -- by their changes additions etc., they brought homeopathy closer to allopathy.

Generally it has shown, that American homeopaths of the 19th century came away from Hahnemann’s inductive reasoning to a deducting reasoning, which needed to have a philosophical-religious belief system of superiority and supremacy.
Eve though never directly quoted, most of this is found in Swedenbourgs mysticism, the belief into it also referred to as the new school. This went that far, that Hering once wrote, that he could not run a successful clinic if he were not a member of the new school.
Now the simple aim to cure disease, as Hahnemann defined it became a religious affair. Homeopathy was seen as the key to liberation of sin, it became part of a religion which saw man’s wrong thinking closely linked to psora, his wrong willing to sycosis and his wrong doing closely linked to Syphilis.
Kent was a great preacher in that sense.
I could go on in greater detail, but time does not allow me to tell more about it.

In this context, I would like to ask Jacob, what exactly these advances are, which he seems to have found.

Hahnemann himself saw Psora not as a theory, even though the term was used in the sixth edition of the Organon, but not from his handwriting,--
Hahnemann saw it as real as his own observations were.

And here is another bit about the practical value of knowledge of Psora.

Initially Hahnemann hoped to cure all psoric cases with only a few remedies.
He already had experience with Mercury and Syphilis and Thuja in the case of Gonne rhea.
He imagined, that if he could identify Psora, then the selection is only more between 4-5 remedies.
But soon after, he was thought by experience, that 12 or 15 remedies make up the group of antipsorics, which he had to magnify to 43! Remedies by the end of his live.

Therefore the knowledge of Psora being the culprit in the given case does not make the selection of the now necessary remedy easier, instead, it even makes it more difficult, as all 43 remedies have pretty much the same symptoms in their provings relating to psora normality.

But each and every of those remedies has some symptoms, outside the common psoric pool of symptoms where they differ IE. where a differentiation between them is possible.

Therefore, it is those momenta in the given case, which will lead to the selection of the remedy, which are not of psoric normality, but are there alongside with them.

And this is the full reason, why it is important to know these chronic miasmatic diseases by their symptoms; to know what’s normal, common to all; -- so that we can spot the uncommon unique momenta (par.: 153) and find a remedy matching exactly these by its characteristics.

Then, in a psoric case, each successive remedy will be selected on the left over non-psoric momenta, as they unfold, whereby with every successive remedy the psoric symptoms have to lessen more and more if the case is going towards cure.

Another few words on the organon:

I already said in short, that the Organon is an ‘’Organon of the healing art’’, which is not limited to homeopathy only. Homeopathy forms part of it, but there is a lot of contemporary medical stuff in it.
One needs to sharply separate those two areas, as medical knowledge is knowledge of the time and has in many ways changed ever since. Some of the medical views were falsified, and critics will always point out that by that homeopathy is falsified.

But if information concerning homeopathy is separated exactly we will find, that whatever Hahnemanns observations were almost 200 years ago, they have not been falsified, and exactly these observations have formed the rules and principles governing homeopathy and not – as so many belief his explanations, which are mainstream contemporary.

For example: the whole discussion about liveforce is irrelevant; homeopathic remedies work in people who belief in it and in people who don’t.

IMO – it would make a nice seminar to dissect the organon and filter out what describes homeopathy.

__________________
Hans Weitbrecht
Consultant Homeopath

Just saw this bit:

>>Morover, constitutions may be relevant to qualities but may not with just only disordered conditions.

If I have understood the point you are making correctly, this again depends entirely on each practitioners expectations of Homoeopathy, and what they are trying to achieve by the application of remedies. In my opinion though, we, as a society, accept FAR too many personality types, and modes of behaviour as 'normal', when they are clearly the products of disease. The extent to which this is applied though, of course, depends on one's perception of such things (hmm, controversial! heh).<<

Maybe the basic realization of Paracelsius may bring Jacob and Kayvee back to earth, when he wrote:

>> Just so Mercury cures – things mercuric.<<


So its not up to the intentions of the practitioner, and his imaginations, what Mercury -- or any other remedy—will/can cure – its determined by the medicine itself, and its capabilities to create an artificial disease state.

Anything else is speculation, which is alien to homeopathy – previously coined by me as the ‘’phantasy therapy’’.

__________________
Hans Weitbrecht
Consultant Homeopath