构成顺势疗法的三大强大思维传统。

IF 1.2 4区 医学 Q3 INTEGRATIVE & COMPLEMENTARY MEDICINE Homeopathy Pub Date : 2024-08-01 Epub Date: 2024-01-29 DOI:10.1055/s-0043-1775814
Josef M Schmidt
{"title":"构成顺势疗法的三大强大思维传统。","authors":"Josef M Schmidt","doi":"10.1055/s-0043-1775814","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>By means of a historical, classical philological and philosophical approach, this paper attempts to demonstrate that homeopathy is based on three powerful traditions of thinking, which can be traced back to Ancient Greece's pre-Socratic era. Actually, it seems to be constituted by what may be termed <i>lógos</i>-, <i>hómoion</i>- and <i>iásthai</i>-thinking: that is, thinking in terms of rationality, similarity and healing. By contrast, modern medicine tends to be aligned with just one of these traditions, at the expense of the others, this being not without risk and adverse effects. It is mainly determined by the first type of rationality that genealogically derives from, and is therefore compatible with, the logic of economics whose predominance in the health care systems of modern societies is progressively rising. Homeopathy, however, may not be sufficiently and fairly understood without taking into account the complementary forms of thinking on which it also rests, such as the principle of similarity in an all-encompassing sense, and ancient healing knowledge in the tradition of catharsis. As a corollary of being essentially constituted by the three, homeopathy may persistently be in need of a dynamic equilibrium of its three constituent bases. Attempts to approach homeopathy from only one of the indicated modes of thinking fail to grasp its essence and result in figments or caricatures of what homeopathy was originally meant to be.</p>","PeriodicalId":13227,"journal":{"name":"Homeopathy","volume":" ","pages":"176-185"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11281835/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Three Powerful Traditions of Thinking that Constitute Homeopathy.\",\"authors\":\"Josef M Schmidt\",\"doi\":\"10.1055/s-0043-1775814\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>By means of a historical, classical philological and philosophical approach, this paper attempts to demonstrate that homeopathy is based on three powerful traditions of thinking, which can be traced back to Ancient Greece's pre-Socratic era. Actually, it seems to be constituted by what may be termed <i>lógos</i>-, <i>hómoion</i>- and <i>iásthai</i>-thinking: that is, thinking in terms of rationality, similarity and healing. By contrast, modern medicine tends to be aligned with just one of these traditions, at the expense of the others, this being not without risk and adverse effects. It is mainly determined by the first type of rationality that genealogically derives from, and is therefore compatible with, the logic of economics whose predominance in the health care systems of modern societies is progressively rising. Homeopathy, however, may not be sufficiently and fairly understood without taking into account the complementary forms of thinking on which it also rests, such as the principle of similarity in an all-encompassing sense, and ancient healing knowledge in the tradition of catharsis. As a corollary of being essentially constituted by the three, homeopathy may persistently be in need of a dynamic equilibrium of its three constituent bases. Attempts to approach homeopathy from only one of the indicated modes of thinking fail to grasp its essence and result in figments or caricatures of what homeopathy was originally meant to be.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":13227,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Homeopathy\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"176-185\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11281835/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Homeopathy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0043-1775814\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/1/29 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"INTEGRATIVE & COMPLEMENTARY MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Homeopathy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0043-1775814","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/29 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"INTEGRATIVE & COMPLEMENTARY MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文试图通过历史学、古典语言学和哲学的方法,证明顺势疗法建立在三种强大的思维传统之上,而这三种思维传统可以追溯到古希腊的前苏格拉底时代。实际上,顺势疗法似乎是由所谓的 "lógos-思维"、"hómoion-思维 "和 "iásthai-思维 "构成的:即从理性、相似性和治疗的角度进行思考。相比之下,现代医学往往只与其中一种传统保持一致,而牺牲了其他传统,这并非没有风险和不利影响。它主要是由第一种理性决定的,这种理性在谱系上源于经济学逻辑,因此与经济学逻辑相一致,而经济学逻辑在现代社会医疗保健系统中的主导地位正在逐步上升。然而,如果不考虑顺势疗法所依赖的互补思维形式,如包罗万象的相似性原则和宣泄传统中的古代治疗知识,就无法充分、公正地理解顺势疗法。顺势疗法本质上是由三者构成的,因此它可能始终需要三个构成基础的动态平衡。试图只从上述思维模式中的一种切入顺势疗法,无法抓住其本质,结果只能是对顺势疗法本来面目的臆造或讽刺。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The Three Powerful Traditions of Thinking that Constitute Homeopathy.

By means of a historical, classical philological and philosophical approach, this paper attempts to demonstrate that homeopathy is based on three powerful traditions of thinking, which can be traced back to Ancient Greece's pre-Socratic era. Actually, it seems to be constituted by what may be termed lógos-, hómoion- and iásthai-thinking: that is, thinking in terms of rationality, similarity and healing. By contrast, modern medicine tends to be aligned with just one of these traditions, at the expense of the others, this being not without risk and adverse effects. It is mainly determined by the first type of rationality that genealogically derives from, and is therefore compatible with, the logic of economics whose predominance in the health care systems of modern societies is progressively rising. Homeopathy, however, may not be sufficiently and fairly understood without taking into account the complementary forms of thinking on which it also rests, such as the principle of similarity in an all-encompassing sense, and ancient healing knowledge in the tradition of catharsis. As a corollary of being essentially constituted by the three, homeopathy may persistently be in need of a dynamic equilibrium of its three constituent bases. Attempts to approach homeopathy from only one of the indicated modes of thinking fail to grasp its essence and result in figments or caricatures of what homeopathy was originally meant to be.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Homeopathy
Homeopathy 医学-全科医学与补充医学
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
70.60%
发文量
34
审稿时长
20.1 weeks
期刊介绍: Homeopathy is an international peer-reviewed journal aimed at improving the fundamental understanding and clinical practice of homeopathy by publishing relevant high-quality original research articles, reviews, and case reports. It also promotes commentary and debate on matters of topical interest in homeopathy.
期刊最新文献
Tracking a Homeopathic Complex Formulation in the Watercourses of a Fire-Damaged State Park in Brazil. Individualized Homeopathic and Organopathic Supportive Management of Sickle Cell Disorder: A Case Series of Six Patients from a Particularly Vulnerable Tribal Group in India. Association between Acute and Chronic Inflammatory States: A Case-Control Study. Homeopathy for Chronic Non-specific Low Back Pain: Study Protocol for a Randomized, Double-Blind, Crossover, Placebo-Controlled Clinical Trial Investigating the Efficacy of the Biotherapic Lumbar Vertebra (The BIOVERT Trial). Homeopathic Pyrogenium Ointment as Adjuvant in Treatment of Traumatic and Infected Myiasis by Cochliomyia Hominivorax (Diptera: Calliphoridae) in Sheep: A Case Series.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1