Basic HTML Version
Volume 106 Number 2
AJHM Summer 2013 75
Objective Observation
is not so much about teaching them
what
to see, but rather
how
to see. We all have an innate capacity for objective
observation. For many, these faculties of perception are
simply under-functioning or underdeveloped.
To my knowledge, most curricula and training programs
bring little substantive direction as to how to engage the
mind and heart, without which high-level proficiency can
be quite elusive to the student. Homeopathy has and al-
ways will be more than a mechanistic science. As a vitalis-
tic healing discipline, mastery of homeopathy necessitates
evolving one’s own being alongside one’s intellectual
growth. Homeopathy is a medicine not only of facts, but
of meanings. Meanings, as such, must be experienced and
felt. The cold, impartial lens of mental observation alone
is not enough.
Think about how the mind, working alone, is often chal-
lenged to discern the truth of things. The mind is so easily
swayed. A good con man is quite capable of mentally con-
vincing his subject about the veracity of his promises, yet
inexorably leads his trusting victims to ruin. Modern-day
Ponzi schemes are perfect examples of this. So too, the
often complex and intricate stories of our patients can and
do easily lead us astray, and divert our attention away from
truth and what needs to be cured.
Humans were given the capacity to feel, and feeling
provides another dimension to perception that allows for
better discrimination of experience. Without this critical
component of feeling, the subtleties and nuances of mean-
ing are easily lost, rendering our perceptions, conclusions,
and decisions less consistent and reliable. By incorporating
feeling into our work with patients, it balances our keen
observing mind. We avoid falling prey to persuasive ideas
that have flaws or dangers lurking behind them.
Bringing the mind and the heart to bear on our ability to
objectively observe means we engage more than thought
in the process of working with our patients. With the addi-
tion of feeling, we open to a more balanced, spontaneous,
and human quality of interacting in the consultation room.
Knowing intimately the depth and breadth of human nature
in health and disease, combined with a deeper and broader
knowledge and understanding of our selves, arguably ren-
ders the homeopath, not ideas and methods, the most potent
tool in this healing work. Our education must incorporate
training for the heart, if it is to serve us best.
The alchemy of healing—which involves mind, body,
and spirit—is, and always must be, one predicated on both
science and art. To be most effective, objective observa-
tion is best informed by a blending of art and science. Its
accomplishment, borne by clinical experience, must in-
volve more than the use of the mind alone. It also requires
a compassionate activation of the feeling side of healing,
stemming from the heart.
Unless we learn to develop and harmonize these two
central aspects of ourselves, namely our mind and heart,
and bring them skillfully to bear on our working with pa-
tients, all the external systems, books, computer programs,
and new philosophies will fail to deliver at the highest level
that we are striving for. The answers we need are not found
somewhere outside of us. Wisdom, understanding, and true
discernment, which result from knowledge and life experi-
ence, coupled with a balanced function of mind and heart,
reside within. The trick is learning how to access and ap-
ply them appropriately, always with a scientific grounding.
Proper training must establish a balance between science
and art, mind and heart.
Many of the new systems and methodologies for un-
derstanding cases sound intellectually plausible and are
aesthetically appealing, yet disappoint many students when
they attempt to apply them on their own.
These teachings
arose from an individual’s creative inspiration and insight,
rooted deeply in their own personal homeopathic experi-
ence and perspective.
Most often, their concepts only
became formulated after decades of clinical work. Such
pioneers created their new vision upon a solid foundation
in the classical methods and philosophy, as well as exten-
sive clinical exposure to patients. What works for the mas-
ters may not come so easily to the student or intermediate
practitioner, if it ever comes at all.
Without the acquisition
of the kind of perception that leads to innovative ideas, the
student or practitioner who attempts to apply them gener-
ally gets very inconsistent results.
As an example, I saw a case not long ago where the
patient had not seen much change after taking several rem-
edies from her previous homeopath. This individual had a
life-long fascination with dolphins, loved the ocean more
than anything else in the world, and demonstrated nurtur-
ing/security issues with her mother. The previous homeo-
path gave
Lac delphinum
(dolphin’s milk), purportedly
based on the above stated factors, but it had no observable
effect whatsoever. The remedy that worked unarguably in
this case was
Baryta carbonica
(barium carbonate), which
precisely matched this patient’s symptom profile, including
emotional and intellectual “backwardness, “ demonstrable
insecurities, and frequent embarrassment, amongst several
of the other observed characteristics.
This example shows how applying theories without
having both feet planted solidly on the ground can lead to
missteps, and ultimately to the selection of ineffectual rem-
edies. The trap that so often befalls the unwary student is
to reference characteristics from external systems that he or
she has already learned because they appear to match what
one “thinks” or “believes” is taking place in the case being
observed. This looking to the outside for answers, before
a resonant connection is made with the case at hand leads
one away from acquiring the vital knowledge requisite for
a true understanding of the case.
In such a fashion, cases are blatantly or sometimes very
subtly forced into known schemas, effectively matching
the symptoms to a category, or concept, rather than the
other way around, matching a remedy to the symptoms.
Needless to say, this tendency frequently leads predictably
to unreliable results. We find comfort in grasping for what