The sad thing about truth is that most people don’t want truth. What they are looking for is confirmation that what they believe is correct.
The careful evaluation of the history and development of homoeopathy will show exactly where problems began to develop and why homoeopathy is in such a poor state today. Putting aside the fact that allopathic use of the remedies began in Hahnemann’s lifetime, a much more serious problem developed in America with Hering. The religious convictions of Hering plus his influence in the homeopathic community led to a change in the methodology and practice of Hahnemannian homoeopathy. So much so that what is taught today as classical homeopathy has no relevance to the medical practice as defined by Samuel Hahnemann.
99% of accepted homeopathic methodology in the 21st-century is based on Kent’s philosophy which in turn is based on the writings of Emmanuel Swedenborg. This simple fact means that real homoeopathy in the Hahnemannian Manner has not been taught in the schools and colleges correctly for over 100 years.
All the modern teachers in the 20th century and up to today, have based their methodology on the incorrect teachings of James Tyler Kent. This has led to the current practice of remedy personalities and emphasis on the emotional and mental state of the patient, as opposed to the Hahnemannian directive of finding symptoms that define the disease state wherever they may lie. Hahnemann’s case books show time and time again that is the disease progresses a variety of medicines will be required to match the changed symptoms at each stage of the disease. This is in direct contradiction to Kent’s assertion that the remedy matches the personality of the person. (And furthered by the teachings of Vithoulkas et al)
The use of the Sensation method is in direct contradiction to the case taking methods as defined by Samuel Hahnemann. It is nothing more than quasi-psychology and the doctrine of signatures. The continued use of this method has directly led to a decline in the quality of good homeopathic medical care and ultimately will lead to the destruction of the therapy in general. Homoeopathy the practice is now in the hands of practitioners that do not know their subject and have no interest in investigating the real methodology of Samuel Hahnemann.
The Institute for homeopathic medicine will continue to publish articles and the methodology as defined by Samuel Hahnemann in the hope that it will be of use to those practitioners seeking clarity and a medically proven method of giving aid to their patients. Homoeopathy is only as powerful as a correct prescription based on sound, rational, justifiable and repeatable grounds. It is up to each one of us to examine why we practice homoeopathy and whether or not we can improve our clinical results by shifting back towards the original Hahnemannian method which was so successful for both Samuel Hahnemann and his students who followed his method precisely.