Samuel Hahnemann's Organon of homœopathic medicine.

  • Hahnemann, Samuel, 1755-1843.
Date:
1848
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: Samuel Hahnemann's Organon of homœopathic medicine. Source: Wellcome Collection.

Provider: This material has been provided by The University of Glasgow Library. The original may be consulted at The University of Glasgow Library.

    18/239 (page 14)
    easily have been designated in accordance to it, by causing them to be severally printed in a difierent type. They con- sist,—1. Of discoveries—experimental propositions, or the re- sults of actual experiment. 2. Of directions or instructions. 3. Of theoretical and philosophical illustrations. 4. Of de- fences and accusations. I.—OF DISCOVERIES. Among men of deliberate and acute reflection, no difference of opinion can exist relative to the truth of a discovery which rests upon the basis of actual experiment. When the author appeals to such experiments, they must be led to a repetition of them, and not oppose their own opinions to the dictates of experience; in fine, they have no other way in forming a judgment, than that of accurate and careful experiment. It may be said that every charlatan, in extolling his nostrums, in like manner appeals to experience, and no one is required for that reason to investigate the merits of his compounds ; but it will not be denied that, although the person of the quack may deserve little forbearance, yet the remedy with which he dupes the public ma}^ in some cases, prove benefi- cial. The old school has received many remedies, mercury among others, from the hands of the quack. But, in the Organon, experience is not referred to for the purpose of lauding any individual remedy ; far more, it has relation to an entire method of cure. None but a vulgar dealer in calumny of the grosser sort, would attempt to de- grade Hahnemann to a level with the charlatan; because he promulgates his views and the peculiarities of his method, as a learned physician, and i^i a manner that is sanctioned by custom, and fully recognised in the history of medicine. But his method, as we have already intimated, appeals to experience. Not to mention the example of Brown, we need only refer to that of Broussais, and the reports received strik- ingly in favour of his doctrines, or even to the contra-stimulus