Remerciez-le!

Remerciez @Admin pour avoir partagé cet document gratuitement, de la manière la plus simple, en partageant sur les réseaux sociaux.

LECTURES ON HOMOEOPATHIC PHILOSOPHY BY James Tyler KENT, A.M., M.D. Presented b

LECTURES ON HOMOEOPATHIC PHILOSOPHY BY James Tyler KENT, A.M., M.D. Presented by Dr Robert Séror Introduction aux Conférences du Professeur James Tyler Kent sur la Tactique et la Technique homéopathique. Par le Docteur Robert Séror, A.E.H.A., D.F.M.A. (1955), Médecin Homéopathe. Pr James Tyler KENT (1849-1916) Les Conférences de Kent sont aussi importantes que l’Organon lui même. Par une étude soigneuse des travaux d’Hahnemann, Kent commente pas à pas, ligne par ligne, les travaux du fondateur de l’homéopathie et surtout, il les éclaircit, les commente. Ce livre de 235 pages est très structuré ; c’est le seul de tous les travaux de Kent qui le soit, c’est dire sa valeur et son importance. Mais, et ceci, est extrêmement important, on ne peut bien comprendre Kent que lorsque l’on a lu et compris les travaux d’Emmanuel Swedenborg. Il y a 30 ans, lorsque l’on prononçait le nom de Swedenborg, c’était une levée de boucliers générale parmi les confrères, et les mots d’illuminés, sectes, voyants etc.. étaient sur toutes les bouches et sous toutes les plumes ! J’y ai participé moi-même et j’en profite pour faire ici mon mea culpa. Mais cela avait du bon puisque cela m’avait permis d’explorer et de comprendre toute l’œuvre de Boenninghausen et surtout de Boger, Nash, Herberts et bien d’autres encore, qui figurent en bonne place sur H.I., ou qui vont y figurer. L’Homéopathie est une ; un bon homéopathe doit connaître toutes les Écoles de notre discipline et savoir les utiliser. On n’apprend pas l’homéopathie en 3 ans, c’est l’étude continuelle de toute une vie, qui se poursuit toujours. Le découpage n’est pas celui de Kent mais le mien, car le défaut bien mineur des Anglo Saxons, est d’écrire ce qu’ils ont à dire, d’une manière complète certes, mais aucunement didactique. En découpant le texte tel que je l’ai fait, sans rien ajouter ni retrancher, je me suis basé sur la compréhension du texte lui- même, de manière à bien me "couler" dans la pensée puissante, logique, lumineuse, évidente de Kent. Il faut lire l’œuvre clé de Kent dans le texte. D’ailleurs TOUT Kent doit être lu dans le texte anglais. Les illustrations qui accompagnent cette première sur le Web proviennent de ma photothèque personnelle mais également de mon Ami, le docteur Jacques Baur, de Lyon, Rédacteur fondateur des Cahiers du Groupement Hahnemannien de Lyon, mais également auteur d’ouvrages d’Homéopathie de poids. Je veux citer avant tout : Docteur Jacques Baur : Homéopathie, Médecine de l’individu (Editions similia, 1999) 735 pages. D’où sont extrait avec son accord les manuscrits de JT Kent ainsi qu’une des dernières consultations du docteur Frédéric Samuel Chrétien Hahnemann- d’Hervilly, quelques mois avant sa mort. Qu’il en soit remercié et honoré. L’homéopathie Pure lui doit beaucoup. Robert Séror 23 Mai 1999. * * * * * Cette lettre de Kent au docteur Hayes, traduit en substance son irritation contre les dynamisations Jenichen dont on ne veut pas lui fournir le mode exact de préparation. Kent renoncera à utiliser des "Jenichen". * * * * * Les pages qui suivent relatent une consultation d’Hahnemann écrite sous sa dictée par son épouse, Marie Mélanie Hahnemann- d’Hervilly. Trois mois plus tard, Hahnemann mourait dans les bras de sa seconde épouse, en lui disant les paroles très émouvantes qui suivent et que Marie Mélanie rapporte ((Docteur Richard Haehl, supplément 156, chapitre XVIII, tome II, page 325). ….. "cinq minutes avant de mourir, il me dit plein de tendresse : Tu seras mienne dans l’éternité". LECTURE 1 : Organon § 1. "The sick" Dr Samuel HAHNEMANN (1755-1843) Homoeopathy asserts that there are principles which govern the practice of medicine. It may be said that, up till the time of Hahnemann, no principles of medicine were recognized, and even at this day in the writings and actions of the Old School there is a complete acknowledgment that no principles exist. The Old School declares that the practice of medicine depends entirely upon experience, upon what can be found out by giving medicines to the sick. Their shifting methods and theories, and rapid discoveries and abandonment of the same, fully attest the sincerity of their acknowledgments and declarations. Homoeopathy leaves Allopathy at this point, and so in this manner the great division between the two schools is affected. That there are principles Homoeopathy affirms. The Old School denies the existence of principles and with apparent reason, looking at the matter from the standpoint of their practice and methods. They deal only with ultimates, they observe only results of disease, and either deny or have no knowledge of the real nature of man, what he is, where he came from, what his quality is in sickness or in health. They say nothing about the man except in connection with his tissues ; they characterize the changes in the tissues as the disease and all there is of the disease, its beginning and its end. In effect they proclaim disease to be something that exists without a cause. They accept nothing but what can be felt with the fingers and seen with the eyes or otherwise observed through the sense, aided by improved instruments. The finger is aided by the microscope to an elongated point, and the microscopic pathological results of disease are noted and considered to be the beginning and the ending, i.e., results without anything prior to them. That is a summary of allopathic teaching as to the nature of sickness. But Homoeopathy perceives that there is something prior to these results. Every science teaches, and every investigation of a scientific character proves that everything which exists does so because of something prior to it. Only in this way can we trace cause and effect in a series from beginning to end and back again from the end to the beginning. By this means we arrive at a state in which we do not assume, but in which we know. The first paragraph of the Organon will be understood by an inexperienced observer to mean one thing and by a true and experienced homoeopath to mean another. Organon § 1. "The physician's high and only mission is to restore the sick to health, to cure as it is termed." No controversy will arise from a superficial reading of this statement, and until. Hahnemann's hidden meaning of the word "sick" is fully brought to view, the physician of any school will assent. The idea that one person will entertain as to the meaning of the word "sick" will be different at times from that which another will entertain. So long as it remains a matter of opinion, there will be differences of opinion therefore, the homeopath must abandon the mere expressions of opinion. Allopathy rests on individual opinion and allopaths say that the science of medicine is based on the consensus of opinion, but that is an unworthy and unstable foundation for the science of curing the sick. It will never be possible to establish a rational system of therapeutics until we reason from facts as they axe and not as they sometimes appear. Facts as they appear are ex pressed in the opinions of men, but facts as they are, are facts and truths from which doctrines are evolved and formulated which will interpret or unlock the kingdoms of nature in the realm of sickness or health. Therefore, beware of the opinion of men in science. Hahnemann has given us principles which we can study and advance upon. It is law that governs the world and not matters of opinion or hypotheses. We must begin by having a respect for law, for we have no starting point unless we base our propositions on law. So long as we recognize men's statements we are in a state of change, for men and hypotheses change. Let us acknowledge the authority. The true homoeopath, when he speaks of the sick, knows who it is that is sick, whereas the allopath does not know. The latter thinks that the house which the man lives in, which is being torn down, expresses all there is of sickness; in other words, that the tissue changes (which are only the results of disease, are all that there is of the sick man. The homoeopath observes wonderful changes resulting from potentized medicine and being compelled to reflect he sees that crude drugs cannot heal the sick and that what changes they do effect are not real but only apparent. Modern physiology has no vital doctrine in its teaching, and therefore no basis to work upon, The doctrine of the vital force is not admitted by the teachers of physiology and, therefore, the homoeopath sees that true physiology is not yet taught, for without the vital force without simple substance, without the internal as well as the external, there can be no cause and no relation between cause and effect. Now what is meant by "the sick ?" It is a man that is sick and to be restored to health, not his body, not the tissues. You uploads/Sante/ lectures-on-homoeopathic-philosophy.pdf