Vol. 25 No. 5 November 2005

The last issue of Homœopathica quoted, on page 12, a German author’s view that homœopathy had made such a poor job of presenting itself as a bona-fide scientific method it should give up on this hope and, to save breath and paper in arguments, profess that homœopathy is really witchcraft, alchemy, etc, at its core.That writer is not alone in his view. Robin Murphy says in his Commentary on the Organon of Medicine: “Knowing the philosophy of alchemy and herbalism’s folklore is a historical part of homeopathy. Two-thirds of our materia medica is from plants and herbs.

Hahnemann knew this shouldn’t be cut off, because we think that we’ve found something better.” Many others think similarly. The fact that Hahnemann was familiar with herbal medicine, and probably alchemitic theory, is no reason to revisit these fields and claim that they have a part to play in contemporary homœopathy. Of course astrology and astronomy were closely intertwined for many centuries, but no one today connected with space-probes, etc, will think it essential to know the significance that can be placed on transiting Saturn conjunct natal Saturn in Leo.

Similarly homœopathy should be striving to distance itself from such notions as: the appearance of things points to their use in homœopathy, “omens” can be used to show what would be good things to prove (as practised by Jeremy Sherr), homœopathic remedies can be used to treat things that happened in previous lives, a proving can be a shamanic experience, and so on and so on.

The greater world of homœopathy has no good reason to tolerate this weird stuff, the New Zealand Homœopathic Society has no policy of letting it flourish unchallenged, and I, as president of the Society and editor of this journal, pledge to do all I can to stop it. Homœopathy is a branch of medicine. It has as much right to be regarded as a science as other branches of medicine; nothing should taint this position.

Bruce Barwell