Re: [H] Did homeopathy kill Steve Jobs, founder of Apple

Wonderful. Thank you, Shannon, for making your thought processes so
explicit.

Okay. Your two mutually contradictory positions, as I understand them from
your clear expression of both of them (sometimes in consecutive breaths),
are:

(A) that homoeopathic method requires employing the homoeopathic principle
-- which requires a knowledge of the medicine's pathogenesis -- which
inherently disallows use of multiple medicines ("combos", mixtures, etc.)
in the prescription; and

(B) that, in a "combination remedy" [i.e. mixture of medicines, inherently
impossible to prescribe homoeopathically and inherently without a stable
pathogenesis], "sometimes *one* of the remedies is homoeopathic to the
case; and that this makes its prescription in the mixture homoeopathic
(though some would disagree or would like to call it homoeopathic but not
classically homoeopathic).

That seems to sum up the two positions you take. Now, if you'd like to
modify either of those positions, I'd be interested. Otherwise, I'd be
interested to know how you can adopt both of them together, in light of
their mutual incompatibility.

It would also be instructive to understand the relevance of the method
you've described below, which mixes a small group of contenders for
medicine homoeopathic to the *entire* case at hand, to the method you most
often defend: prescription of "combos", which do not use such a group of
candidates chosen for similarity to the entire case but instead combine
medicines *prominent in the single symptom of interest*: warts, allergy, or
whatever else it may be that the practitioner agrees is the target of the
day. How does one bear on the other? You surely aren't capable of
believing that if the warts disappear under the onslaught of these "wart
remedies", it means that one of the "wart remedies" has cured the patient's
entire malady?

Kind regards,

John

On 19 December 2011 14:20, Shannon Nelson <shannonnelson@tds.net> wrote:

>
> On Dec 18, 2011, at 9:08 PM, John Harvey wrote:
>
>
>
> Okay: you agreed unreservedly not half an hour ago on the Minutus list
> (post quoted below) with the contention that "homoeopathic method
> requires employing the homoeopathic principle --
>
>
> Eeeyyyaaaggghhh! Okay...
>
> 1) A loose application of the homeopathic method (i.e. matching symptoms
> with pathogenesis) is employed to select a *small group* of remedies which
> *might*--if they and the case were explored more carefully--prove
> sufficiently homeopathic to the case.
>
> 2) Said small group is (gasp) combined into a single "combination remedy".
>
> 3) Assumption is made that presence of the others does not interfere with
> the potential actions of each singly (debated assumption).
>
> Sometimes it works. That's why combination remedies have continued to
> have adherents.
>
> Are the remedies "homeopathic" to the cases to which they are applied?
> Sometimes *one* of the remedies is; sometimes none is.
>
> Is it homeopathy?
> I understand your reasoning for saying it is not.
> I understand that Hahnemann disallowed it.
> I also understand why some people say that it *is*, and personally I don't
> much care.
> But----
>
>
> which requires a knowledge of the medicine's pathogenesis -- which
> inherently disallows use of multiple medicines ("combos", mixtures, etc.)
> in the prescription".
>
> Now you agree again, but then say
>
> ... assumption is that *the* relevant remedy which acts, and that the
>> other ones do nothing.
>
> Yes I realize that is a disputed point.
>> Yes I realize that Hahnemann specified to use only one remedy at a time.
>>
>> Combo chosen by a more-or-less superficial application of homeopathic
>> principles.
>
>
>> Next?
>>
>
> Next is to make up your mind which of your mutually contradictory
> positions you will take, for longer than five seconds.
>
>
> Okay, just for fun:
>
> Please re-state for me, in your own words, per your own understanding,
> without cut-and-paste, exactly what those two mutually contradictory
> positions are.
>
> Thanks!
>

--

"And if care became the ethical basis of citizenship? Our parliaments,
guided by such ideas, would be very different places."

—Paul Ginsborg, *Democracy: Crisis and Renewal*, London: Profile, 2008.
_______________________________________________
Homeopathy Mailing List
homeopathy@homeolist.com
http://lists.homeolist.com/mailman/listinfo/homeopathy