The Science and The Art by James Tyler Kent
Up to this time we have been studying principles that relate to the knowledge of Homoeopathy. At this point Hahnemann arrives at three important conclusions as to what we have been studying in application to practice. There are three steps to be surveyed:
1st. “By what means is the physician to arrive at the necessary information relative to a disease, in order to be able to undertake the cure?” Of course that relates to the disease in general, and the patient in particular. In going over the 3rd paragraph, we gathered together the means of studying an epidemic and each man in particular.
We shall now proceed to study disease in general and the patient in particular, from now on to the end of this course. All the rest of the study is of such a character. There are a great many questions that arise in this problem that must be studied in detail, the study of the nature of acute miasms and the study of the nature of chronic miasms; the study of such changes as show there are two distinct classes of sickness. Each one is to be studied in its most general way, and each person as a particular entity.
2d. “How is he to discover the morbific powers of medicines; that is to say, of the instruments destined to cure natural disease?” This constitutes a study of the Materia Medica and a knowledge of how it is built, which is by provings, by recorded facts.
3d. “What is the best mode of applying these morbific powers (medicines) in the cure of diseases?” This involves the study of all methods and settling upon that which is best.
To proceed in the study of these in a rational, scientific and careful manner is the object of the future study of this book. It leads from now on, from the science of Homoeopathy to the art of healing. We see that we have now gone over the principal part of that which is merely science, the science of Homoeopathy. We have none of the enormous classifications in the study of Homoeopathy that are resorted to in traditional medicine; they should not appear in the study of applied Homoeopathy.
The study of the classification of diseases as is done in traditional medicine is useful, because we come in contact with the world. As the Boards of Health require us to state what particular disease, according to classification, a patient died from, classified in accordance with old school nosology, we have therefore, to go into the study of diagnosis. In Homoeopathy, diagnosis cuts very little figure in the treatment; but all the ultimates in the case must be brought forward and described by name.
We want the use of adjectives, we want the use of large language, we want descriptive power, in order that the nature of the sickness, which is all that man can know about the disease, may be brought out on paper, and thereby caused to appear at any time thereafter to the mind of the physician. If the physician were simply to make a study of the disease, and after studying it were to give it a name and let that name constitute the record, no future prescription could be made. And the physician, thereafter, in referring to this record, would know nothing about its nature. The name conveys no idea of the nature of the sickness, only its place in a general classification. A knowledge of the nature of individual sickness is necessary for a prescription, and this depends upon the ascertainment of the details.
The very first of this study is to prove and realize that there are two classes of diseases, acute and chronic. The general classification of all diseases is made in this way; the acute are thrown into one group and studied as acute diseases, and so with the chronic.
An acute miasm is one that comes upon the economy, passes through its regular prodromal period, longer or shorter, has its period of progress and period of decline, and in which there is a tendency to recovery. A chronic miasm is one that has its period of prodrome, period of progress and no period of decline; it is continuous, never ending, except with the death of the patient.
The acute diseases need much less study than the chronic. They are all such as are contagious or infectious, such as have a miasmatic character and are capable of running a definite course. When man disorders his stomach and has an attack of vomiting, and from which he has no after trouble, he has suffered merely from an indisposition. Such conditions from external causes are not miasms.
Things that go through the mouth into the stomach and thereby produce sickness act either as rousers up of some old trouble or as mechanical causes of disturbance. The pure disease, on the other hand, whether acquired or inherited, are those that flow from the innermost to the outermost while making man sick. These causes that make man sick are influx of simple substance and they run a fixed distinct course. Each one has its own time of prodrome, its own period of progress, whereby the traditional school of medicine has fixed what it calls pathognomonic symptoms. It is well to know these symptoms, not for the purpose of naming merely, but for the purpose of association.
The study of disease should not be for the purpose of naming; if it is so, the name does harm. When you think of a child suffering from measles, the idea of measles may go out of mind, but the character of the sickness of that particular child must remain in the mind. At first you will not be able to see what is meant by that, especially if you have been in the habit of studying cases for the purpose of diagnosis.
I do not say this to throw a cloud upon diagnosis, but to show that the study of diagnosis is not for the purpose of making a prescription. The more you dwell upon diagnostic symptoms, the more you will becloud the ideas entering the mind that lead toward a prescription. You might go into the room and work an hour individualizing a case, deciding whether it were measles or scarlet fever (there are some confusing cases in the beginning). Well, you might say, it is measles, and must now have Pulsatilla, or scarlet fever and must have Belladonna.
You will really see that such a state of affairs is misleading to the mind. If you are in an epidemic, where it is necessary in order to save the neighbourhood, to know, for instance, whether a certain case is of cholera or not, then it becomes necessary to do the two things. The family and the surrounding families are entitled to the safety that a correct knowledge would give and that protection, isolation or quarantine would afford. There are two kinds of study, one with a bearing toward the classification that the disease belongs to, and one with reference to the remedy that the patient needs; but I prefer to settle the patient first as to the remedy he needs, and this has very little to do with the classification, except in a general way.
After a remedy has been decided upon that clearly covers the symptoms and the patient receives his dose of medicine, the next point is, what step is necessary to take in order to protect the people if this is a contagious disease. Diagnosis is something that a physician cannot afford to be foolish about, he cannot afford to be a blunderer, he cannot afford to go around calling scarlet fever measles, and measles scarlet fever.
He must know enough about the general nature of diseases that after the prescription has been made and the patient settled as to that, and the mother wants to know what is the matter with the child, to tell her, for, in that instance, she has a perfect right to know; that is, a case where the family must be protected, where outsiders must be protected; the physician must decide whether it is proper for the child to go to school, or whether it is not proper.
There are some conditions of chronic diseases which closely resemble acute diseases; for instance, these mimicking acute attacks that come on regularly as periodical headaches. One attack, singled out, might have the appearance of an acute miasm, yet the tendency to progress and not to recovery shows that it belongs to the chronic class. Those disorders that come form debauchery and drinking and overeating, from immediate circumstances that are periodical, are things that arise from the latent psoric condition; they are momentary sickness, and if it were not for the fact that man suffers from chronic miasms he would not have these; these attacks would not form a sickness, would not have an appearance of acute sickness. It is due to chronic miasms that man has these little recurring attacks. These do not come with a prodromal period. a progressive period and a period of decline; they may have an attack and decline, but not a prodrome. The acute miasms like the chronic have the prodromal period.
Par. 72 says: “Relative to the first point, it will be necessary for us to enter here into some general considerations. The diseases of man resolve themselves into two classes,” etc. Remember that the acute diseases always tend to recovery; the chronic diseases have no tendency whatever to recovery, but a continuous progressive tendency; they are far deeper miasms.
There are three of these chronic miasms that belong to the human family–psora, syphilis and sycosis–and these we will take up and study. The worst cases are those wherein the three chronic miasms, or some parts of the three, have been complicated by drugs. When the effect of drugs has been removed then we may begin to study the pure miasms themselves, but the miasms are complicated at the present day in most men, for whenever we come in contact with chronic sickness we come in contact also with chronic drugging and its effect upon the vital force.
I am of the opinion, perhaps I am wrong, that when blood-letting was in vogue, when violent cathartics were thrown in, when emetics and sweating were prescribed, as in the olden times, when all these violent things were resorted to, the human race was not torn to pieces as rapidly as at the present day. The enormous doses of Jalap and Calomel rushed through the intestines and cleaned out the patient, and he felt better afterwards, and probably did not carry to his grave the internal results of that cleaning out.
He did not carry the internal results of the emetics and sudorifics, but at the present day small doses of concentrated drugs are administered, which have an insidious effect upon the economy and develop their chronic symptoms very slowly. From the continued taking of old school products, the alkaloids, etc., we have the most dreadful state that has ever occured in the history of medicine coming on. The aim is to get small doses, to get an insidious, effect. The milder preparations, like Sulphonal, require months to develop their chronic tendencies, and are most vicious and troublesome drugs.
These slow and subtle preparations are now being manufactured, and though seeming to produce a mild primary effect have secondary effects or after-effects which are very severe. Hahnemann said, in his time, the most troublesome chronic diseases were those that had been complicated with drugs. If that were true then it is ten times so now. The little headache compounds, the catarrh cures, etc., are milder as to the first effects, but more violent as to the last effects. They are prepared to imitate the palatable form of homoeopathic remedies.
LECTURES ON HOMOEOPATHIC PHILOSOPHY BY JAMES TYLER KENT –
The old school of Allopathy considered about `sickness’ and `medicine’ in a particular way.
– The sphere of sickness was limited to the physical level. Only tissue changes were seen and considered.
– The source of sickness, process of sickness, the nature of sickness and the concept of real health were not studied.
– Only the result of sickness was felt with fingers, seen with eyes and observed by sense through instruments.
– The meaning of restoration of health was confined to relief in the ailments of particular organs where they appeared. – Drugs were used in crude forms to remove the ailments.
– The system was based entirely on experience. Decisions were made on opinions of individuals at different times and concensus of opinions or hypothesis.
– Pathological findings formed the basis of the diagnosis.
– The internal of man–his mental and emotional aspects were not considered.
– Symptoms–the language of sickness, at the levels of mind, emotion and body were not studied.
– Every pathological result had its corresponding bacteria.
– Doctrine of Vital Force had no place for them.
– Prime importance was given to the organs of man, and not to the man himself which constituted of body mind and emotions.
Will and understanding of man not studied and considered
Dr. Hahnemann `proved’ the drugs on healthy enlightened human bodies. He found that the drugs affected the mind, the emotions and the body and the effects are expressed through symptoms and modalities. He also found that these drugs in potency are able to remove Similar Sickness appearing in human beings. He discovered an Universal Truth; a truth based on `science’ where opinions do not matter, experiences do not form basis; source of sickness, process of sickness and the nature of sickness is explored and the correct curative agent is found.
Dr. Kent has interpreted and explained the various aspects of Hahnemann’s “Organon of the Healing Art”. His lectures are so vivid that they mirror the fundamental laws of health and healing to the mankind at all levels of understanding. This book was written about 90 years ago-but still, the concepts hold true in the present times. He was an empirical Hahnemannian. He could not compromise with the deviation from principles and philosophy and we find his criticism sometimes sharp and bitter of `Pseudo-homoeopaths’.
KEYNOTES OF PHILOSOPHY
– Man is the will and the understating and the house which he lives in is his body.
– The organs are not the man. The man is prior to the organs.
– The order of sickness as well as the order of cure is from man to his organs. The real sick man is prior to the sick sick body.
– A man is sick prior to localization of disease. When we wait for localization, the results of disease have rendered the patient incurable.
– Symptoms are but the language of nature, talking out, as it were, and showing as clearly as the daylight, the internal nature of the sickman or woman.
– Crude drugs cannot heal the sick and that what changes they effect are not real but only apparent.
– Tissue changes are of the body and are the results of the disease, they are not the disease.
– The bacteria are results of the disease. The disease cause is more subtle.
– The remedy, which will produce on healthy man similar symptoms, is the master of the situation, is the necessary antidote, will overcome the sickness, restore the will and understanding to order and cure the patient.
– Man consists in what he thinks and what he loves and there is nothing else in man.
– The physician has to `perceive’ in the disease that which is to be cured, and that is through `totality of symptoms’. He has to perceive the nature of disease and the nature of the remedy.
– Experience has only a confirmatory place. It cannot take the place of science and truth.
– All true diseases of the economy flow from centre to circumference. All miasms are true diseases.
– The active cause is within, and the apparent cause of sickness is without. If a man has no deep miasmatic influence, outer causes will not affect him.
– Homoeopathy has two parts: the science of homoeopathy are the art of homoeopathy. One has to learn the art of homoeopathy to prepare himself for the application of the science of homoeopathy.
– Vital force is constructive and formative, and in its thing in the universe has its aura. Every star and planet has it. The remedy to be homoeopathic must be similar in quality and similar in action to the disease cause.
– As soon as the internal economy is deprived in any manner of its freedom, death is threatening; where freedom is lost, death is sure to follow.
– Potency should suit the varying susceptibility of sickman.
– Any more than just enough to supply the susceptibility is a surplus and is dangerous.
– Human race has been greatly disordered in the economy because of surplus drug taking.
– Primitive cause is not in the bacteria. Bacteria themselves have a cause to appear and survive.
– Over sensitive patients are actually poisoned by the inappropriate administration of potentized medicines.
– Their chronic miasms are complicated with chronic drugging and its effect upon the vital force.
– The physician who can only hold in his memory the symptoms of a disease or a remedy will never succeed as a homoeopath.
– The majority of such as call themselves homoeopaths at the present time, are perfectly incompetent to examine a patient, and therefore incompetent to examine homoeopathy.
– It is impossible to test homoeopathy without learning how to get the disease image so before the eyes that the homoeopathic remedy can be selected.
– At the present day, there is almost no such thing as an unprejudiced mind.
– Do not prescribe until you have found the remedy that is similar to the whole case, even although it is clear in your mind that one remedy may be more similar to one particular group of symptoms and another remedy to another group.
– It is unaccountable, therefore, that some of our homoeopathic practitioners make use of palliatives that are so detrimental to the patients.