Page 6 - Layout 1

continued from page 3
4
Let us firstly look at the whole question of the art of homeopathy and how it fits in to the established mode of healing and scientific “understanding” of the majority of the medical and veterinary professions. Here we already face many problems, and an understanding of these helps us to rationalise the difficulties we face as we try to fit the homeopathic healing system into the rigidity of the perceived “science” of illness and disease from the allopathic viewpoint. The greatest divisions we face as a homeopathic family lies within this conundrum: classical versus complex; low potency versus high; pure homeopathy or complementary to other therapies; engaging with the allopathic scientific community or looking on every interaction as a confrontation and a challenge. There is a clear and obvious underlying reason why the attempts to fit a square peg into a round hole will forever create difficulties.
Let us briefly look at the way disease is perceived by the two groups, although the mere acceptance of there being “two groups” is a problem that needs addressing – more about this later. I shall start this discussion by asking what it is that gets ill. This is a simple question that needs “ill” to be defined, but most people would probably answer “the body” to this question; so now we need to clarify what we mean by “body”. We have one word for “body” in English, but the German language has the advantage of having two:
“Das Korper” means the physical body, the accumulation of organs, skeleton, nerves etc that makes the machine that we call (in common language) a body, which is the main or only understanding of the word in most peoples’ eyes. When conventional doctors discuss disease, as we all know, it is subdivided into anatomical bits, which is why, when having multiple problems, you need to see multiple consultants within the same hospital, and may need to be ferried from one ward to another. Often one does not