Jiri Cehovsky: Homeopathy - More Than a Cure

Fourteenth Chapter


The Irrational Basis of Scientism

When someone says the "modern science", it is like a magic formula. No objections are allowed against "modern science". Interestingly, there cannot be any other science but modern science. Science that is not modern is not a science. Non-modern science, non-contemporary science, is something of the past, it is surpassed, it is not a science any more. Science therefore does not represent a complex of solid unshakeable knowledge. It is a transient image of the world and of life, in which that what held true twenty, or fifty, or only five years ago, is often no longer true. Modern science, as it appears in the school projects, momentarily represents a canon, with which the world is supposed to be measured. It is a materialistic canon. It however bears all the signs of a religion.

The Czech revivalists (there was a revivalist movement in the early 18th century, stressing the independence of the Czech nation and the language, trans. note) have brought attention to the strong similarity of the Czech language to the Indian languages, particularly to Sanskrit, which points to the common basis, from which these Indo-European languages have formed. The Czech word for science - věda - is related to the Sanskrit word Veda. Vedas have existed for millennia and till the present times have been canonical and unshakeable bearers of a certain religious conception of the world, which they protect and sustain. We too have our Veda. Within this modern Veda - věda - science, certain axioms are being proclaimed, foundation stones of the teaching, which cannot be disputed without risking excommunication and damnation.

The Body of Materialism

First of all comes the notion of life and therefore of thought at its summit, as having originally evolved from the matter, through entirely materialistic processes. Meaning that the whole evolution has moved from below to above, from the lower material manifestations and lower forms to the highest manifestation of the matter, which is the thought. From the anthropological point of view, the human thought and life are the direct result of a whirl of hydrocarbons a few billion years ago. To the contemporary medical science it is such a whirl even now. This is why a psychiatrist, having diagnosed a mental defect, would prescribe a medication, which in his opinion would regulate the material processes in the body (in brain) and thus influence the defective mentality. In short, because of this axiom, a modern scientist is unswerving in his conviction that the organism is organised in the same direction as it has originally evolved, from below, from a lifeless form, towards the more vital form. And in the same direction he tries to influence the organism. The lifeless form is most important to him, the cause of all processes. It is the essence. This is why the modern medical science is only interested in the materialistic side of things. At post-mortems or X-rays, it notes the changes in organs. Under the microscope it looks for the material cause of disease, which it sees in viruses and bacteria. It only finds causality in material connections, because it knows of nothing else. The lower the article of the causal chain that the modern scientist has detected, the happier he is, because he is convinced that he has come closer to the fundamental. The whole direction of modern scientific research and naturally of medical research, is to penetrate down. To the lower and lower organisational levels. Thus in physics we see the aim to penetrate at any cost to the smallest building blocks of the matter. To penetrate all the way to what is considered to be the essential, to the cause of all things, to the tiniest elementary particle. In medical science this is manifested in the search for the most basic processes within the cell and its core, in the chromosomes. The smallest articles of the body, the lowest organisational structures, the least vital, appear to modern scientists to be the basic, the most important, the fundamental. They think that influencing them through genetic engineering, they can improve the organisation of the entire body.

Characteristically, to aim towards the lowest and organisationally the simplest articles, where the hypothetical principle is to be eventually found, the primeval substance, the cause of all things, the materialistic deity, is a hopeless task. If in the physics of over fifty years ago this was the atom, now it appears that in the cyclotrons a fission of any particle is possible, with the use of more and more energy, apparently to infinity. The atom is no longer an elementary particle. Nowadays modern scientists know of bosons and gluons and neutrinos, etc. New, smaller and smaller particles, are being created in the laboratories, nearly every week. There is nothing fundamental to be found. Many physicists now express the opinion that matter is like a string, which could be cut into any number of pieces (they could hardly argue against the homeopathic infinitesimal dilution). The primal cause is probably not here. This sad announcement, which virtually marks the end of modern science of the nineteenth and twentieth century, is made by the avant-garde among the modern scientists, whose voices naturally have not as yet had any repercussion on the school projects.

The Crisis of Materialism

The basic problem of modern physics is also the question of the origin of the world, which presents an insurmountable paradox to the inquiry - if the essence of the world is to be found in the lowest particles, what did the world actually originate from? Where is the cause? Here the modern physicists find their limits, returning once again to the old proven metaphysics. It is the most advanced physicists, such as Einstein, Heisenberg and others, who can see that the prime cause may lay above, after all. In something indescribable, connected with the thought, rather than with an atom or a boson. Acknowledging statements by leading physicists about Buddhism, God, etc., attest to this. Does not the theory of the Big Bang fall within the Buddhists opinion that Universes are being created and become extinct endlessly? The American physicist Fritjof Capra wrote the book The Tao of Physics, where he maintains that everything discovered by the most modern physics was predicated by the Chinese and Indian Buddhists thousands of years ago.

Physics is the vanguard of science. Newtonian physics once laid the foundations to all other sciences. Newtonian physics, with its constant and reliable image of the world, was displaced by the relativistic physics - and seventy years later the other branches of science are cautiously beginning to take some notice. However, even the relativistic physics may now have been displaced or perhaps complemented - in its pinnacle - with the return to the ancient idealistic belief that the cause of everything does not lie below, but above.

The same process happens in the medical science, somewhat delayed in comparison to the physics. Genetic engineering may be finding ways to change the genetic code, to work with DNK and RNK, but for the practical treatment this has little significance.

At best this leads only to further suppression of the symptoms, to further development of chronic diseases and to a break down of the natural defensive system of the organism, perhaps even of its natural structure. Because the organisational basis of the entire human body and mind is not situated in the organs, or in the cells, not even down in the DNK (or even lower?), but opposite at the very top, in the nonmaterial organisational centre. Should an organ or even DNK be cured, this cure must come from there, where the DNK is organised and where it has originated.

The revolution in the medical science at the beginning of this century was brought about by the psychoanalyses, which in its Freudian materialistic conception has emphasised the importance of the mind, and in the Jungian idealistic conception then advanced further, revealing the spiritual dimension of man, superior even to the mind. Psychoanalyses will be dealt with in more detail, it is enough to state here that after a correctly conducted psychoanalyses a spontaneous cure of physical problems might follow, which totally confirms the homeopathic principle of treatment: outward from the centre, from the mind to the physical organs.

Another axiom, the basic pillar of modern science, is the idea that science supports the technological progress, which then facilitates the improvement in people's life conditions. It cannot be argued that science facilitates the advancement of technology. At the end of our technological century however, the more stringent question arises:

Does Contemporary Technological Progress Support Life?

Above all we must realise that most technological branches have been developed mainly for military purposes, therefore the killing of people. This concerns aviation, rocket technology, astronautics, chemistry (let's not forget that the Nobel Price for scientific achievement comes from the money made from selling explosives), heavy industry, manufacturing tanks and cannons, electronics (I have heard the opinion that the collapse of the Soviet Union was caused by its inability to keep the pace in development of electronic technology for operating the defence system), nuclear industry (manufacturing nuclear arms). The needs of these primary industries are also conditioned by the development of energetics, transport and propaganda (television, newspapers, radio). Let's remind ourselves that the allopathic medicine has always made a leap in times of war (cold or hot). Once I asked a Buddhist scientist (naturally a psychologist) what he thought of modern science. He answered that it was not much good, as according to the survey by the Scandinavian institute SIPRI more than 70% of the current scientific research is for military purposes. Yes, it is important to know not only what is being done, but also why it is being done.

Fortunately, the balance of fear in the age of atomic bombs does not allow war between the superpowers, so that technological progress has so far not lead to the destruction of mankind, even though the destruction of life on Earth through the efforts of modern science and technology is perfectly possible and can be carried through at any time in a matter of hours. Nevertheless, secondary results of technological progress may lead to the destruction of life just as reliably though perhaps a little more slowly: atmospheric pollution, pollution of earth and water and also of animal and human bodies, through industrial waste. Dramatic development of chronic diseases, with human psychology on a decline, increased aggressively, to a large degree caused also by allopathy. Ozone holes caused through the influence of freons and other emissions. Sudden changes in the atmosphere (increased volume of CO2), caused by the burning of oil and coal. The glasshouse effect. The changes of climate and advancement of deserts. Extremely fast fall of numbers of animal and plant species. The loss of faith in the future and the escape to materialistic values (looking "downward" for the primal cause). All these are clear signs of an advancing catastrophe. It is an obvious proof that the euphoria of modern science, this materialistic Veda of the twentieth century, will have to subside, if life on this planet is to continue.

People are beginning to realise that all is not well. Despite of the destructive forces, the ecological consciousness was born, on the increase is the general interest of people in spirituality, holistic treatment and particularly in homeopathy. Homeopathy, which has been established on the world scene for two hundred years, and at present is fast developing, probably marches (even though many homeopaths and their patients are not fully conscious of this) at the front of this stream of modern revival. In front, because of being the most widespread alternative method of treatment, because it is already used by millions of patients, it fulfils the requirement for wholeness, not only in the holistic concept of man and his health, the totality of mind and the body, but also the wholeness of human life and its environment, wholeness of nature and universal processes, appurtenance in the most general and extensive sense. Homeopathy means total treatment. And also total responsibility.

Positive Influences of Technological Progress

When emptying the bath tub, why should we get rid of the child with the bathwater? Like any other phenomenon, technological progress is also two sided. It has a good and a bad side. The bad one appears to momentarily predominate. However, there are also positive aspects: transport, communication, television and other media, which make possible the transmission of vital information, among other information about homeopathy. There is for instance the computer net Homeonet, facilitating long distance consultations and instant exchange of information. The advancement of technology in agriculture means regular and ample nourishment of the population, which undoubtedly is the main cause of the prolonged average human life in this century. The advancement of the culture of living has a very important positive influence on the state of health of the populace. The manufacture of nonchemical products made possible many new homeopathic remedies. Computer technology has produced many homeopathic diagnostic programmes, which help to correct and speed up the diagnoses. So we can see that both sides, the forces of destruction and the forces of organisation, have the same technological means at their disposal. In a extraordinary way this is accordant with the fundamental principle of homeopathy, to cure like with the like. The fact remains however, that homeopathy can essentially make do with the level of technology present at the beginning of the nineteenth century, when technology was far more merciful to the environment and to peoples' lives.

Scientific Arguments Against and For

It would be appropriate to mention the most characteristic arguments modern science uses against homeopathy, when it takes notice of it at all. It sees as its main fault the high dilution of homeopathic remedies. There is the so called Avogard limit, the dilution of a substance to the power of 10 to minus 23, beyond which the diluting medium cannot contain any particle of the original substance. The Avogard limit is identical to the homeopathic potency C 12. Homeopaths nevertheless mostly use much higher potencies (dilutions). The scientists therefore conclude that homeopathic remedy, which cannot contain any effective substance, can only act as the so called placebo. The classical medicine happened to have noticed that the actual psychological effect of administering a pill (a placebo), which does not contain any medicinal substance, may cause a certain small and temporary improvement of the patient's condition. Essentially this is a variation of the biblical "you were cured by your faith". In no case however can the placebo effect go so far, as regularly curing an acute illness with fever in one day, or to cure an allergy or diabetes. If the placebo effect were really so powerful, the previous doses of allopathic remedies should have also had this curing effect. An overwhelming majority of patients come to the homeopath only after long lasting unsuccessful treatment by allopathic medication. From the point of view of the placebo effect, the allopaths should even have an advantage, because they administer the pills regularly for a long time. A classical homeopath often gives out only a single pill, followed by months, even years without medication, while the patient's case is still developing positively.

Another argument against the placebo effect is the treatment of small babies, who could hardly distinguish one sugary pill from their ordinary food. And exactly with small babies, thanks to their strong vitality, we experience the most remarkable success in treatment. Homeopathic remedies are also given to people while they are unconscious. Even then they act in the normal way, as if they were administered in full consciousness. There is even a whole branch of veterinary homeopathy. Faith of poultry, dogs and cats in placebo, is surely a debatable matter. Another fact that opposes the placebo theory are the results of tests of remedies on healthy people. A certain homeopathic remedy causes in people, who do not know which remedy they have received, the same variety of symptoms. Finally, there are a number of scientific studies, where with the help of the double-blind trial (a standard method of testing any type of remedy), the effectiveness of homeopathic remedies was proven beyond doubt. For example, in 1983 at the Pharmaceutical Polytechnic School at Portsmouth, tests on mice were conducted that validated the analgetical effects of Arnica C 30. Similarly successful were the double-blind trials conducted at the homeopathic hospital at Glasgow, with potentised pollen preparations (potency C 30), in treatment of hay fever. The method of double-blind trial demands however, that nobody, not the person who receives the remedy, nor the person who administers it, knows whether a placebo or a remedy is being given, and it should also not be known beforehand who would be given the actual remedy. This does not agree with the fundamental philosophy of homeopathic treatment. In homeopathy a remedy is not administered to all, to a particular symptom, but there is a strict individualisation, with the prescription based on the complex picture of the patient. Double-blind trials therefore only concern the "recognisable indications" of remedies to a particular symptom, and depart somewhat from the framework of homeopathic method and do not belong to the mainstream of homeopathy. Curiously, most allopathic remedies were not subjected to any double-blind trials and, surprisingly, their effectiveness has not been at all doubted. The results of a double-blind trial are often unfavourable to well known allopathic drugs, of which the general public is not very well informed.

There are also statistically orientated clinical studies, concerning the effectiveness of homeopathic treatment in daily practice. One of these, by the Dutch practitioner van Berckel was published in 1994 in our health magazine Statim.

On the part of physical science, positive results have emanated from the trial by French scientists, who have tested water containing the thirteenth centesimal potency of Silicea through a method of nuclear magnetic resonance. They found out that water containing the potency had different parameters than water without the infinitesimal potency and that homeopathic remedy has changed the structure of water. The results of the trial were published in Journale de Medicine Nucleaire et Biophysique. Naturally, such a result pleases the homeopath. At the same time it makes him realise how far the contemporary modern science has gone in its search for the materialistic cause of all things. Thousands of scientists, physicists, chemists and biologists have been cured through homeopathy from various ailments. This, for the physical, chemical and biological science is no proof. Personal testimony of these people and those near them has no value to science. Science, on its way to the lowest organisational structures above all trusts the lifeless, the dead. It trusts a metallic hand of a device, a crystal digital scale, a screen. That, told by a living person about his or her experience, of feelings, is dubious, because it may have been influenced by the psychology, if not by something higher.

Very few modern scientists understand that such an attitude after all is nothing else than a display of their collective psychology.


[Next Chapter] [Table of Contents]

© Jiri Cehovsky, 1994
Translation © Voyen Koreis, 1997


poslední aktualizace: 30.08.2006