*** ALL natural forces are based upon law. These laws do not operate in a limited field, but are universal. To illustrate, the law of gravitation is not limited in its scope to the earth, but its influence extends throughout the universe.
Hahnemann, but his fine observation and the inductive method of reasoning, became convinced of the law of cure, *similia similibus curentur, and embraced it and declared it to be universal, a basic law of therapeutics.
If there is any general law of cure, that law must express some relationship between the medicine and the disease. To be of any practical use such a relationship must be exhibited, and we must be able to demonstrate such a relation between a disease and its remedy that an examination of the former shall determine the latter. Nothing can be known of the disease save through the phenomena known as symptoms; these are evident to our observation and senses and must be recognized These phenomenal represent the individuality of the disease in the only way in which we can recognize it. A corresponding capability exists in the drug, of producing an individual, although artificial, disease, which we recognize through the same method of observing the phenomena produced after the administration of the drug. The power to produce these phenomena is what we call the properties of the drug.
It is the characteristic of disease to produce certain phenomena which are not observable in perfect health. This is true whether the changes are functional or structural; what we recognize as symptoms are all that can be known of the disease. It is only through the observation of these expressions that we can make any use of the law of cure, and there can be no general consideration of the rule of cure unless it comprises a consideration of symptoms as one of the necessary elements. One might say that a comprehension of the symptoms of a given case was one of the primary factors, and in so far as one comprehends the expression of disease in these phenomena is one equipped to follow the law of cure in any particular case. Symptoms are the only representative expression of the diseased state. We include sensations as expressed by the patient, the appearances in all parts of the body, the varied circumstances under which these symptoms were recorded, and the varied grouping of these symptoms, in any consideration of the case.
When a symptom is noted under certain circumstances and not under others, this obvious relation between the symptom and its related circumstances is in itself a symptom, or rather, a past of the symptom, the sensation being quite incomplete without the expressed relationship of circumstance. Very often the concomitant of circumstance is of greater importance to the whole case than the expressed sensation, but the sensation is much more frequently expressed by the patient.
Two or more symptoms may appear together, or synchronize with each other, so frequently that they are really one symptom and must be considered as such in our analysis. As nothing in nature can be represented by a single property, so no disease can be represented by a single symptom.
A law of cure must represent some relation between the properties of a disease and the medical qualities of a drug; or in other words, we must have some concept of the character of the drug’s action on the living body that will interpret the law of cure in the action of disease.
This character of the drug is represented, not by a single effect, but by a group of effects. This group of effects is the only representation we have or can have of the medicinal character of a drug on the living body, these same effects are found in disease states, these effects are the only relationship that can be established between the medicinal effects of a drug and disease. *There can be no law of cure unless it expresses some definite relation between these two groups, or classes.
*The homoeopathic law establishes a definite relation, not only between proved drugs and known diseases, but between all the unexplored medical wealth and the undeveloped requirements of sickness. Like the law of gravitation, the law of cure as taught by Hahnemann is not, and cannot be, limited to a small group of conditions; the limitations rest entirely with our ignorance. Hahnemann and his followers constitute the only group of medical philosophers who have always been true to the inductive method of reasoning,. and by scientifically following this method of reasoning, based upon known facts, they have established this law of therapeutics.
It has been proven by experience that a medicine will remove a group of symptoms similar to the group which it is capable of producing. This law, founded upon observation of facts, has been the product of inductive reasoning and has been proven by heats of experience to be true and sure.
No medicine can cure any disease unless it acts upon all the diseased parts, either directly or indirectly. The more similar the symptoms of a drug resemblance to the disease, the nearer is its vital approach to the disease, and the more dynamic its action. The number of parts of human body susceptible of receiving the curative action of drugs vastly outnumbers those recognized in the anatomy, because, disease and cure do not lie in the tissues except as a reflection of the man himself. This we may see from the almost infinite diversity of symptoms producible and curable by drugs. There is an almost infinite number of parts or cells in each organ, and this vast number are suffering together, some more or some less; the affection of each elements may be different from that of any other, the aggregate affection composing the disease of that tissue of that one organ. How much more complicated is the disease of the whole body, even though that manifestation be classed as a “local disease”! One organ cannot suffer along any more than one cell can suffer by itself. Every disease affect in some way and to some degree every organ, every tissue, every molecule.
Because of custom we express ourselves in this sense as from the greater toward the smaller, from without inward, yet an analytical study must remind us that the disease manifestation is an exfoliation, an outward manifestation of an inward turmoil, that is not found in the most minute examination known to man of any cell or portion of the human frame. We may find disease manifestations, but we cannot find disease itself.
No medicine can effect a perfect cure unless it has a curative action upon every diseased part and in just the proportion that each part manifests disorder. Potentized medicine, administered according to the law of *similia, is the true regulator of the vital energy, that vital essence which is synonymous, or at least analogous, to the man himself and lies very close to life itself.
The totality of any disease is the totality of the morbid action, sensations and manifestations; and true and complete and comprehensive law of therapeutics must recognize all the morbid phenomena and show some relation between them and the curative agent. This relationship must be direct and clear.
Joslin says the degrees of conceivable relationship between the action of drugs and that of disease may be represented by an immense circle. Identity is the central point, and on this point stands *isopathy. Immediately around it are arranged the most perfect degrees of similarity. This is the province of *homoeopathy, the *simillimum. Contiguous to this is the ring of similarities, less perfect but still great; this field is the field of the near similar but not the *simillimum.
Isopathy is not homoeopathy; we must keep this distinction ever before us. Isopathy is identity homoeopathy rests its whole case on the similarity, and in the degree of its perfection we may be sure of the results.
We cannot be accused of combating symptoms; rather we are guided by symptoms in combating disease.
The law of cure, *similia similibus curentur, is as fundamental as any law in nature. It is a law of universal adaptability to human sickness; it ranks in the field of medicine with Newton’s law of gravitations in the field of astronomy. This is the only general law for the cure of the physical and mental ills of man; it is the only method of healing that deepens, as a whole, upon one general principle, and it is the only method of healing that has continued to withstand the pressure of time and changing circumstances. It is a law of nature, discovered by following the thread of inductive reasoning, and proven to be true by countless tests.
What is the most we can hope to know of disease?
What can we know of drug action?
What part does observation play in homoeopathic prescribing?
What kind of symptoms are most frequently voiced by the patient? (*Answer: sensations)
What are concomitant symptoms, and how do you rank them as two relative value?
Why do we say: The homoeopathic law establishes a definite relation between drugs and diseases?
What are disease manifestations?
What is the difference between isopathy and homoeopathy.