I know what you're talking about. Maybe some who exclusively use computers haven't seen the Introduction to Kent's repertory, but years ago I used to primarily use that big thick repertory, along with all my other books that thank God, have been integrated into my software now! But some important parts, like this one, have been left out.
I don't have the book with me right now, but he said something along the lines that when the homeopath evolves into an artistic prescriber, it is then when he has most probably gained some mastery of his craft. I'm sure Kent, as his notoriety would suggest, was a master homeopath. And thus he knew what it took to be one.
And I think newer methods of case taking, prescribing, and analysis as set forth by homeopaths such as Jan Scholten, Lou Klein, Rajan Sankaran et al. which have been picked up and highly appreciated by many other homeopaths who've been able to use them successfully, is a way in which homeopaths as a collective are starting to evolve their craft in a truly artistic way.
The opponents of these advancements, such as the George Vitoulkos camp, are concerned either of students missing the basic knowledge and methods we've been provided historically, or, they have a prejudice that newer methods are flaky, anthropomorphize too much, or look bad to scientific minds and undermine our credibility. Yet they choose to remain ignorant to:
1. what the newer methods are all about, or how to use them,
or 2. the possibility that these developments carve an infrastructure for artistry in homeopathy that allow us as a collective to master our craft closer to the highest ideal of health. And that by putting our innovation out to the community, we will take much less time to become masters than if we relied only on ourselves, or on prior ways of doing things.
And 3. Although we can still be concerned about more research to demonstrate the value of our medicine, we can also stand alone, outside the confinements of biomechanical medicine, and shouldn't care what others think.
They can also be guilty of the same old thing science often is seen doing, that is, of suppressing art.
--> Similar to the old mind over matter, Man over Nature, etc.
Ironic, given that homeopathy, in its holisitic nature, is the science of the artistry of Nature!
First comes the craft, then comes the art. without craft there is no art.
Applying this to homeopathy:
First comes Materia medica study, then study of the organon.
Once sufficient knowledge is established, and all the rules and principles are known by heart and applied, then only! by the repeated skillful application homeopathic treatment, therapy becomes an art.
A practitioner who has the craft down to a fine art may be called a master of homeopathy.
Prescribing by repertory: creates the craft of book-use or computer- program-use. this should not be misstaken as the craft of homeopathy)
Prescribing by one-to-one comparison with MMP: creates the craft of comparison - the symptom lopper as Kent calls them. This is not craft of homeopathy)
Selecting and applying medicines according the rules and principles, knowing the obstacles to cure and removing them, alongside the willingness to see failure as failure and to analyze those situation to such detail, that the mistake made becomes clear and will not be repeated gives the learned practitioner a chance to become a master.
Starting out to practice without true knowledge of the remedies, no idea of application, no idea of obstacles and their removal will never create a master of the art, because he / she does not know what they are doing.
Wanting to improve on a therapy without being a master of it only reflects on the unwillingness to do the homework first, before going out to do the job.
In short, only the through and continue study of materia medica and use of their knowledge according to Organon of medicine, convert an ordinary prescriber to an artistic prescriber. Thansk for comment
Application of Homeopathy in practice is identical to Indian classical music.where each raga carries definite notes and sequence( Materia Medica) and it is mathematical in nature( Organon), yet each of the performer creates the ragas, artistically with in the sphere of those notes, which is absolutely governed by the laws of rhythm and notes.Even the slightest deviation will change the color of that Raga.It is an art, but governed by certain stringent laws.
Similarly Homeopathy is governed by laws of Organon, knowledge of Materia Medica and other laws.Thus each one of us develop and create the pictures of drug personalities, in our mind by reading various Materia Medicas and we look for these drug pictures in the real individuals, who come to us for their treatment.A slight mismatch and we may land with wrong prescription.Even after the use of proper repertory, we have to make final decision for the selection of remedy,depending upon most close drug picture.The same medicine Aconite may match with different patients, suffering from different diseases, in different situations.Selection of Homeopathic medicine is an art, embedded in science.
The book by Margery Blackie about the drug pictures is a suitable example.
Please allow me to express gratitude for being able to witness, as such, this type of conversation among homeopaths. I would be greatful if any of you could point me towards other such discussions as I'm quite new on this site and still a little lost. I appreciate, as a third year student of homeopathy, this chance to listen and learn. Thank you.