Contraria contrariis curantur hippocrates biography

INTRODUCTION

The nephrotic syndrome (NS), the glomerular disease (GD) in generally, is one of the most debated and challenging issue for the clinical nephrology. The uncertainty concerning the GD is reflected by the low grade of the existed clinical guidelines, (only 2% of clinical guidelines are grade as A (1) and the unwilling of nephrologists, (15-46%) to adopted them as it was recorded from a Canadian study (2) two years after the KDIGO guidelines.

The clinical nephrologist stands uncertain in front of the GD, where the cause is unknown, the treatment unsafe and the future uncertain. This uncertainty was expressed in ancient Greek philosophy (the aphorism quotes the first two lines of the Aphorismi) (3) by the ancient Greek physician Hippocrates:

“Life is short, and art long, opportunity fleeting, experimentations perilous, and judgment difficult.”

The above mentioned observations were the trigger of wondering about the utility of medical history and philosophy in facing current dilemmas in daily medical practice. The belief that philosophy is a matter of great value when it can be redeemed in daily life and practice and additionally that philosophical theories still produce apparent results upon the current practice of medicine overarches the text below. In order to support this, a peculiar approach was attempted. The retrospection of history of medical science and philosophy in parallel with the history of NS and GD. This was an interesting challenge to consider: both continuity and change in the practices of medicine (what traditions did medical practitioners draw upon – even as they made radical innovations) and the relationship of medicine to its wider culture.

HISTORY OF SCIENCE, PHILOSOPHY SCIENCE AND HISTORY OF MEDICAL SCIENCE (4, 5)

Science represents the only robust and trustworthy way of knowing both the w

Please help support the mission of New Advent and get the full contents of this website as an instant download. Includes the Catholic Encyclopedia, Church Fathers, Summa, Bible and more — all for only $19.99...

The history of medical science, considered as a part of the general history of civilization, should logically begin in Mesopotamia, where tradition and philological investigation placed the cradle of the human race. But, in a condensed article such as this, there are important reasons which dictate the choice of another starting point. Modern medical science rests upon a Greek foundation, and whatever other civilized peoples may have accomplished in this field lies outside our inquiry. It is certain that the Greeks brought much with them from their original home, and also that they learned a great deal from their intercourse with other civilized countries, especially Egypt and India; but the Greek mind assimilated knowledge in such a fashion that its origin can rarely be recognized.

Mythical, Homeric, and pre-Hippocratic times

Greek medical science, like that of all civilized peoples, shows in the beginning a purely theurgical character. Apollo is regarded as the founder of medical science, and, in post-Homeric times, his son Æsculapius (in Homer, a Thessalian prince) is represented, as the deity whose office it is to bring about man's restoration to health by means of healing oracles. His oldest place of worship was at Tricca in Thessaly. The temples of Æsculapius, of which those at Epidaurus and Cos are the best known, were situated in a healthy neighbourhood. The sick pilgrims went thither that, after a long preparation of prayer, fasting and ablutions, they might, through of mediation of the priests, receive in their dreams the healing oracles. This kind of medical science already shows a rational basis, for the priests interpreted the dreams and prescribed a suitable treatment, in most cases purely dietetic

Abstract

A clear definition of its subject and correct application of its tenets are the basis of any science. Conversely, the want of a unanimous understanding of its constituting principles by the homeopathic community is undermining its scientific practice, research and discussion. To facilitate these, first and foremost the Principle of Similars, similia similibus curentur , has to be clarified and assessed in terms of its theoretical meaning, historical development, and epistemological status. Hahnemann's conceptions, explanations, and appraisals were not static but evolved and hardened over the years, especially from 1796 to 1810. While initially he related similia similibus to an imitation of similar cures by nature and proposed it as an opposition to contraria contrariis , he later generalised it to the treatment of any disease. Whilst originally he considered it to be a hermeneutical principle, or a hint towards a curative remedy, Hahnemann later dogmatised it as the only truth. Considering advances in epistemology and theory of medicine, however, the Principle of Similars may not be assessed as a final truth or natural law to be empirically verified or falsified for good, but rather as a practical maxim, guiding the artist of healing in his/her curing of diseases rationally and individually.

Keywords: history of medicine, theory of medicine, homeopathy, Principle of Similars, epistemology

Introduction

What is homeopathy? This simple question may not only provoke but also remind homeopaths and their critics of the basic structure of exploration by which philosophy and rational thinking began to be scientific. By questioning, e.g. a commander “What is courage”, a priest “What is piety”, or a mathematician “What is knowledge”, etc., it was Socrates who first dared to do what nobody had done before: challenging experts of different disciplines to give an account of the basic conception on which their profession, identity, and purp

Words: Shefali GAUTAM

This is the edited version of the essay that won the First Prize in ThinkWellness360Essay Writing Competition 2022 for Homeopathic Medical College Students.

Introduction

Hippocrates [460-370 BC], the father of medicine, postulated two principles of treating diseases: one, Contraria Contrariis Curantur [Latin], which means opposites may be cured by opposites. This principle teaches us to treat disease by using remedies that produce opposite effects. The other principle is Similia Similibus Curentur [Latin], which means ‘let similar things take care of similar things.’ Hippocrates was known to have said, “Through the like, disease is produced, and through the application of the like, it is cured.”  This is now universally known as similia principle.

Homeopathy was introduced as a medical system of therapeutics by Dr Christian Frederick Samuel Hahnemann [1755-1843], a conventional German physician, chemist and polyglot.

The system, following Dr Hahnemann’s pioneering efforts, owes its recognition to the concerted efforts of several eminent allopathic practitioners of the time, who opted for homeopathy and used it with remarkable success. Besides, the establishment of medical organisations began to take credit for the homeopathy revolution. This action was true to the predictions of William James — that there are three stages in which new ideas are accepted into established thought and practice. The first stage is that the idea is worthless, and advocates of the idea are charlatans and quacks; the second stage is that it has been discovered that the idea is true, but of little, or insignificant value; and, the third stage is that the establishment’s research has concluded that idea is true and valuable, more so, because the establishment helped verify its value, and claim to be the original and rightful advocates of the idea.

We could also credit the conventional medicine of the late 20th century for contr