ETERNAL DERIVATIVES
Increasingly outraged by the negligence of so-called homeopathic prescriptions, I sought a line of reasoning that would allow me to move beyond simple condemnation, which has become tiresome after 30 years of practice. Since protesting is clearly of little use, we could at least try to understand the origins of a scourge that appears to be widespread in the field of science in general and medicine in particular. We will conclude by looking at the meaning of the article's title.
The severe lack of homeopathic and medical education is a common thread running through all these ectoplasmic aberrations that we have been denouncing for so many years. What does "homeopathic education" mean? It is the in-depth study of the aphorisms of the Organon, as Hahnemann developed them over 55 years of uninterrupted research and reflection (our master still stayed up every other night until his death).[1]
A STRANGE blindness
The clarity that every practitioner should have about their own practice should lead them all to ask themselves a very simple question, and this is true for both allopathic and homeopathic practitioners: are the results there? What I mean by this is that we Hahnemannians —since we must give ourselves a name—are becoming more enthusiastic about our practice every year because our progress never stops, while we are achieving more and more cures requiring less and less time to find the right remedy, and successfully treating conditions that we would previously have thought incurable.
It is just the opposite of conventional medicine, where each year increases the feeling of powerlessness and uselessness, ultimately leading to a shift toward politics for those who are better off. And it is the same feeling that prevails among all those who, in the name of homeopathy, practice these abuses and rush from one internship to another.
Since our practice opened 30 years ago, we have been confronted with a stream of disappointed, dissatisfied patients who have continued to suffer for years after consulting all the most eminent specialists to no avail and undergoing every possible test and treatment. This disappointment on the part of patients is not immediately apparent to doctors working in hospitals, as their attention is focused on the condition they are trying to treat. Patients are therefore sent home and we hear no more about them, which is very convenient...
These people (i.e., soon to be almost all patients with chronic diseases) then turn to "alternative" medicine. They face a real obstacle course before ending up in the "claws" of a "homeopath" who will literally drag them around for years. A few will realize before their supposedly homeopathic doctor that something is wrong with what is being offered to them: "It's holistic, but you're giving me lots of medication," "He asks me what I want to be treated for," etc. The rare few who hear about true homeopathy end up with Hahnemannians as a last resort. Most of the time, the story is the same: endless interviews, prescriptions for bizarre remedies, i.e., highly improbable medicines that have not been tested (milk from various mammals, bird feathers, lanthanides and other rare earth elements, tyrannosaurus teeth (sic), excrement, fossils, etc.). To top it all off, the prescriber changes the medication at each consultation (thus committing the most basic mistake in homeopathy, which is to change too quickly), with an almost systematic resort to allopathy (especially at the slightest acute episode) because "it doesn't work."
Now let's put these obvious facts together:
- We have prescribers who inexorably observe, every day in their practice, that their practice yields little or no results, yet they persist in the same direction.
- Their prescription is justified by adherence to theories that all have one thing in common: they have no scientific basis. Let us mention the most popular ones at present, along with the names of their inventors:
- Sequential therapy (Elmiger)
- Sensations Method (Sankaran)
- Periodic table (Scholten)
The pursuit of the requirements of the theory to which they adhere is so pervasive that they no longer have the critical faculties necessary to evaluate any action we perform in everyday life (cooking an egg, washing, etc.). A century ago, it would have been isotherapy, gemmotherapy, Schüssler salts, etc.
A state bordering on fanaticism
Alain wrote, "There is something mechanical about fanatical thinking, because it always follows the same paths. It no longer seeks, it no longer invents. Dogmatism is like a reciting delirium. It lacks that diamond point, doubt, which always digs deeper."[2]
Of course, we homeopaths have never hidden our enthusiasm and passion, but this emotional state stems from our healings, that is, from the comparison between clinical results and our understanding of homeopathic doctrine, which we constantly revisit.
The difference with fundamentalism is that it is enthusiastic about an idea, and reality is therefore superseded by the application of what becomes a dogma. Confronting reality is increasingly difficult, and we are clearly dealing with two major ingredients of fanaticism:
- The mental divide: facts and results are no longer considered; the only thing that matters is the fulfillment of the theory held to be "right" at all costs.
- Belief: in the absence of factual evidence, we are faced with a belief that no longer represents rational adherence to a body of ideas or logical demonstrations.
In short, we are less and less in the presence of a doctor for whom pragmatism must always prevail, but rather faced with the exaltation of an idea that seems to fill and enlighten the prescriber through the supposed understanding of the world and human beings that it provides. How many unfortunate people confuse homeopathy with spirituality? And yet, it takes a great deal of effort to call the embryo of mystical ramblings "spirituality."
Philosophy, our lifeline
How can we guard against such errors? The answer seems clear to me: by philosophizing, since philosophy is defined as a process of reflection on available knowledge. This is exactly what Hahnemann proposes in the journey he takes us on with the Organon, where he uses nearly 300 aphorisms to establish a general overview of medicine, homeopathy, and how to apply it.[3] The first 70 aphorisms represent the core of homeopathy in the form of analysis, definition, creation, and meditation on the concepts that underpin the new paradigm.
One of the fundamental flaws of homeopathy (since its inception) can therefore be identified: Hahnemann's discoveries and reasoning are never taught[4], and students are left behind in learning what amounts to a simple technique, without understanding the foundations that make it revolutionary. Only a mastery of homeopathic philosophy, preferably supplemented by a large dose of epistemology (Karl Popper), provides the necessary perspectives for clinical practice and self-evaluation of results.
Dictatorship of technicians and scientists
This misfortune is not unique to homeopathy; it is a hallmark of all higher education, and I include, of course, the prestigious universities that are supposed to train our "elites." Indeed, such a deficiency leads to the production of technicians, just as standard scientific faculties (medicine, biology, or other) produce tens of thousands of them every year. Technicians themselves filled with another form of fanaticism, merely regurgitating the materialistic and reductionist ideas they have been taught.
A very interesting article published in The Week[5], "Why are so many scientists ignorant?" expands on and highlights the ideas developed here. We learn that many big names, including Stephen Hawking, are as categorical as they are completely ignorant in the field of philosophy. For these men of science, philosophy is largely useless because it cannot give us the kind of "certain" answers that only science can provide, and philosophy is nothing more than speculation. To dare to speak of "certain answers" in science is, unfortunately, a kindergarten-level statement and rightly causes astonishment. The brilliant authors, completely unaware of the remarkable work of Hume, and of course Karl Popper in epistemology, do not even realize that to claim that philosophy is useless is precisely to engage in philosophy.
The author concludes that many of these gentlemen loudly proclaim their public atheism, declaring that matter is the only thing that exists. Their position is based on scientism, or, if you prefer, the notion that things can only be known through science.
David Bentley Hart[6] observes that what all these people have in common is a stubborn refusal to think. "The fundamentalist is not someone whose ideas are too simple or too crude, but someone who stubbornly refuses to think either through other ideas or through those ideas themselves."
Fundamentalist "thinking"
The harmful effects of this fanatical thinking are insignificant when it comes to pure science, or if we remain distant from human beings. Otherwise (in medicine, politics, society, religion), the effects are multiplied, which is logical since society as a whole is built on philosophical choices. This illustrates the devastation wrought on a society when, for example, the executive branch seeks only to apply an ideology, disregarding all reality.
Remaining a pure technician by describing the entropy of black holes (Hawking), or a pure mathematician by solving Poincaré's conjecture (Perelman), affects almost no one. Closed-mindedness, whether called fundamentalism or a prelude to fanaticism, has the worst effects in medicine, where each member of a different sect will strive to apply to people the precepts that have been instilled in them, without questioning them or discussing them in the light of reason.
But let's get back to our subject and take the example of a newly graduated allopathic doctor fresh out of medical school. As in any formative organization, he has been literally trained not to think for himself, to the point of being taught that individual opinion is worthless and that only statistics matter. A seed of rebellion may sprout when our student begins to grapple with the reality of the world of patients. Perhaps he will eventually realize that statistics originally applied to seeds that were all alike are being applied to people, even though this cannot be the case for patients, who are all different from one another. Going further, he will wonder how to believe statistics produced by an industry that generates billions. Then one day he may realize that the whole edifice is rotten, since we arbitrarily treat isolated symptoms when every patient presents a specific set of symptoms, which is only an indirect reflection of a completely dysfunctional economy. But just as we had one resistance fighter for every 100,000 collaborators, how many will have the courage to change? Isn't it more comfortable to stay with the status quo, telling yourself, "It's ugly, but it's my livelihood"?
Those who are less philosophical and undoubtedly closer to those in power will readily become the most zealous. Who remembers the names of homeopathy's detractors? Already covered by the shroud of oblivion, they nevertheless sporadically emerge from their graves to haunt the media. Useful idiots or lackeys of the industry, they are used as scarecrows when, despite the small number of competent homeopaths, too many people are no longer consuming enough.
Mental manipulation
These leading figures of triumphant allopathy then serve us the same old tricks of mental manipulation:
- Repeating the message
- Focusing on a minor detail
- Context abstraction.
Conversely, you will observe that the same manipulation is used to glorify modern medicine, which is periodically shaken by sensational discoveries or the release of long-awaited new products.
We are here at the exact opposite end of the spectrum from the philosophy that seeks to have the broadest possible horizon. Repeat anything over and over again, relay it across millions of screens, and the victims on the other end will eventually believe it. Focus on what can cause the most offense: "Homeopaths are crazy; they give out medicines that have been scientifically proven to be empty." Take this out of the context of the 300 aphorisms of the Organon to reduce the entire edifice of homeopathy to this single statement. And there you have it!
In defense of these gentlemen, it must be admitted that there is much to criticize in homeopathy as it is often practiced. But after doing everything possible for a century to prevent its teaching, should we be surprised that many charlatans have seized upon it? And besides, if patients were satisfied with the official treatments touted by official propaganda, would they rush en masse to anything different? Unless you live in a sterile environment disconnected from reality, such as a hospital ward, simply listening to patients reveals their growing dissatisfaction with traditional medicine, which they increasingly abhor.
[1] You will note that my request is nothing out of the ordinary: as in any branch of science, it would be appropriate to learn what your predecessors have discovered before considering yourself capable of progressing on your own.
[2] Alain, Propos sur les philosophes, p. 37. PUF Publishing.
[3] Kent's lectures on the subject are entitled "Homoeopathic Philosophy." My own publication of the first volume, "Principles of the New Medicine," is a commentary on the first 70 aphorisms in 400 pages. The second volume, "Practice of the New Medicine," will be 800 pages long.
[4] It was to fill this gap that I created Planète Homéo, the only school I know of where all teaching is based solely on the6th Organon (which I have completely retranslated), taught and commented on from start to finish. I am proud to witness the emergence of a veritable breeding ground for true homeopaths. Finally, the situation is likely to change.
[5] http://theweek.com/articles/610948/why-many-scientists-are-ignorant
[6] Bentley Hart, a prolific and fascinating author, wrote, among other works: "The Atheist Delusions," "The Beauty of Infinite," and "God."
