
Cogito ergo erro…(sorry, Descartes)
As homoeopaths we must be aware of perhaps the no. 1 pitfall in analyzing a case. And once you notice it – it cannot remain un-noticed.
Homoeopathy is not a therapy based on hunches or intuitions. It is a therapy based on observation of fact, and knowledge. Just go back to the Organon aphorism 3 – or simply consider the obvious. The homoeopath’s job is to observe and elicit the information about the disease (case-taking), to know what is curative in remedies (knowledge of provings, poisonings and clinical experience), and to find the appropriate remedy, administering it with appropriate potency and dosing. Continue reading →
Case-taking and analysis: “knowing” versus “thinking”
Cogito ergo erro…(sorry, Descartes)
As homoeopaths we must be aware of perhaps the no. 1 pitfall in analyzing a case. And once you notice it – it cannot remain un-noticed.
Homoeopathy is not a therapy based on hunches or intuitions. It is a therapy based on observation of fact, and knowledge. Just go back to the Organon aphorism 3 – or simply consider the obvious. The homoeopath’s job is to observe and elicit the information about the disease (case-taking), to know what is curative in remedies (knowledge of provings, poisonings and clinical experience), and to find the appropriate remedy, administering it with appropriate potency and dosing. Continue reading →
Leave a comment
Posted in Admin comment, Case-taking
Tagged analysis, case-taking, Descartes, hahnemann, homoeopathy, knowing, organon, remedies, thinking