Aphorism 1: The job of a physician

If you were writing a monster book of medicine, where you want to show the world how superior homeopathy is and outline how to correctly think about health and disease, how would you start? And if you titled it “Organon of Medicine”, what would you talk about first? I would start by talking about medicine – I mean medicine is the topic of the book, and in the title. Hahnemann’s precursor to the Organon, called the “Medicine of Experience” also emphasized medicine and the task of medicine heavily. But Hahnemann deviates in the Organon by focusing on the physician's duty or job is first.

After you get through a bit of a headache-inducing (for me anyway) preface and introduction, he starts the main body of the text by telling physicians to stop monkeying around and to start making people better. He says it more formally of course: "The physician's high and only mission is to restore the sick to health, to cure, as it is termed.1" (Dudgeon’s 1849 translation)

In relatively typical Hahnemann fashion, he ends this nice, short, illuminative statement with a much longer footnote:

"1: His mission is not, however, to construct so-called systems, by interweaving empty speculations and hypotheses concerning the internal essential nature of the vital processes and the mode in which diseases originate in the interior of the organism, (whereon so many physicians have hitherto ambitiously wasted their talents and their time);

"Nor is it to attempt to give countless explanations regarding the phenomena in diseases and their proximate cause (which must ever remain concealed), wrapped in unintelligible words and an inflated abstract mode of expression, which should sound very learned in order to astonish the ignorant - whilst sick humanity sighs in vain for aid.

"Of such learned reveries (to which the name of theoretic medicine is given, and for which special professorships are instituted) we have had quite enough, and it is now high time that all who call themselves physicians should at length cease to deceive suffering mankind with mere talk, and begin now, instead, for once to act, that is, really to help and to cure."

Notice that I made each sentence a separate paragraph – it wasn’t like that originally, I just think it’s easier to read. Also, it shows just how convoluted and long each sentence actually is! I read that one translator of the Organon, Steven Decker, once said you could judge someone’s health by their ability to read Hahnemann’s sentences. If they can follow such convoluted language, they are obviously in great health! If they can’t, then they need to go visit their homeopath for a remedy.

Also, notice that the footnote is a continuation of the aphorism, but in the aphorism Hahnemann says what a physician’s mission IS and the footnote says what it is NOT. In this way, the purpose of his aphorism becomes more clear. He often uses footnotes this way, where he adds definitions, examples, or says what something is not in the footnote. He is also often more colorful in his language. He keeps it buttoned up in the aphorisms (usually) but lets loose in the footnote.

Anyway. Back to the content of the aphorism.

I don’t think he is necessarily defining a physician here (in other words, a physician is not necessarily defined by the fact that they make people better) but defining the purpose of a physician (as in, why do we need physicians in society). And the purpose of a physician is to make people better, not to theorize about why people are sick or impress their patients with their superior intellect.

Some people also go into the definition of the word physician – especially as homeopaths in many countries are not considered physicians, so you have to wonder if he’s still referring to us? But in one version by Wenda Brewtser O’Reilly and Steven Decker, there is a glossary where they delve into some of the translational issues. In this glossary, they note that the term as it is used here refers to any medical professional. So we would still apply. But so would reiki practitioners, psychiatrists, TCM practitioners, herbalists, whatever.

The wording “high and only mission” is sometimes translated as “highest and only calling” or “The physician’s highest calling, his only calling”. Clearly right away Hahnemann has created a hierarchy of callings or duties for a physician where curing people is at the top and everything else is below. Physician’s have a lot to do – many of these things are outlined in the aphorisms that follow – but the most important or the guiding principle, is to cure patients.

Now, some people get hung up on the word mission, because mission has an implication of some religiosity. (think a mission trip) However other people translated the word as “calling” or “aim”. Neither of the other translations have any connotations of a religious component, so I don’t think it’s necessarily what he intended. I also looked up the original German word – beruf – and Google translate says it’s more like profession, occupation, job, etc. I don’t mean that google translate is better than these professional translators, but the fact that not a single word came up that has a religious connotation is further evidence that he did not intend religious overtones.

The last bit of translation debate I will get into today is curing vs healing. Some authors translate it as healing, some as curing. In german, the term for both is the same– heilen – which is why some people probably translate it as healing and some translate it as curing. In English, curing connotates that a physician gave you a substance that cured you, whereas healing connotates a healing that your body undergoes itself. It’s like the difference between a scratch healing on its own, versus a doctor curing you of an infection with antibiotics. Steven Decker believes the connotation Hahnemann intended was curing, which makes sense in context as this aphorism is about what the physician is doing, not on what the body does on its own.

The footnote lays the foundation for a lot of topics that we will talk more about in further aphorisms – namely the fruitlessness of investigating the inner nature of disease, investigating the fundamental cause of disease, and theoretical medicine. Now when it comes to the cause of disease…he just spent a long introduction dissing the idea of a cause of disease, and then disses it here, and yet Kent’s entire discussion on this aphorism is about how homeopaths are the only ones to know the true cause of disease. Oh Kent.

So. Physicians should be curing people. But what should a cure look like? How does a physician go about curing people? Those, in fact, are the topics of the next 2 aphorisms.