Response by Joerg Wichmann to Ruy Madsen
15.November 2018 (online)
Since we know each other personally, I will rather address you as such. Thank you for your critical remarks about my last article. You are giving me the chance to re-think a few points and to clarify where the article was obviously too abstract.
I agree with you, that we have to individualise not only patients and remedies but also the perception of crisis itself, and of worlds even, I would say. Indeed many of us live in completely different worlds and what seems to be self-explanatory for the one may sound alien to the other.
For me it looks like this: That our world (meaning the human world of our culture on this planet) is in a deep crisis and what this crisis is about seems completely clear to me and everyone I talk to. To explain this further feels like explaining that the Earth is a globe. But you are correct, this is only my perspective, and others may live in a very different world and don't know what I am talking about. And ‘crisis’ itself is, of course, not a reality, but a concept that has been built from a specific perception of one part of reality.
The crisis I had in mind has not mainly to do with political parties in certain countries and the problems they may cause. Of course, the Temers and Trumps and Merkels of this world create many problems that could be avoided, but I was looking at a deeper level of crisis, of which corrupt politicians are only a symptom. My perception of crisis is that of global changes in climate, of huge shifts of population caused by hunger and war, loss of fertile ground and water supplies in many countries, extinction of species on a large scale, right wing movements taking over in many countries and pushing toward new wars, exploitation of the poorer parts of the world by the rich and militarised states, etc. What I have written makes sense only for those who see this as a problem as well.
You are also right in that we are only able to act on an individual and concrete level. As we use to say, ‘Act locally and think globally’, my perspective in this article was to think on the global scale, which was not meant to denounce acting on the local level. Both parts of the polarity are necessary and interdependent. Probably my approach was too abstract in some parts—quite a common mistake of mine—and I could have emphasised the importance of the individual work that is already being done and which you and I also do every day.
And, of course, we don't need to agree with Hahnemann. I didn't quote him so often, because I think, Hahnemann's words were some kind of ultimate truth. They are not, as we all know, and besides this we are not a sectarian group. But I found it interesting to see that Hahnemann gave good advice 200 years ago, that we have not yet realised but which would help us a lot in our present situation.
So you need not agree with the high goals he is setting, of removing obstacles to health even of those who are not ill yet and to enable all people to follow their creative spirit (I will not repeat my quotations and arguments of the article here). None has to see the world like Hahnemann of course. But in these points, I do, because I think they help us, as homeopaths and as human beings.
If my article gave the impression that I wanted to put the burden of having to save our whole society on top of all the work we have to do as homeopaths anyway, I have to apologise. This would be overwhelming indeed.
Instead my intention was to give some more strength to our efforts by showing that we can see ourselves as part of a large global network of people who are striving for the same goals.
I respect all those whose individual world is not tainted so much by what I perceive as the global troubles and pains. And maybe they are happier and wiser than me and those who share my perspective of viewing the world. Yet only for those with the same view of the world as mine have I written down my thoughts.
For me, this global crisis is nothing abstract at all, but I can sense it deeply within myself, my mind and my own body. It is shaking my deepest foundations and I have to work on solutions for this, to find means to go on living in such an insane world.
My motivation to write this article was that I felt what helps me could also help those of our colleagues who feel the same. Give strength and perseverance to their efforts.
But just as you say: What makes the one sick, doesn't touch the other. And of course, a remedy that is curative for me doesn't make any sense for those who are not touched by the same disturbances. Probably I was not making this clear enough. Please see my article as just an attempt to suggest a remedy for those who suffer from the same as I do.
Those who live in different worlds and suffer from different ailments will have to look for different remedies (and articles) of course. This is our homeopathic wisdom, and I am glad you mentioned it.
As you know I am working with the concept of sensation homeopathy, where we call the dynamic disturbance that makes us ill ‘the other song’, of which there are many different ones. I believe that there are ‘other songs’ also on a collective level, that not only individuals but also large groups of people or cultures can be touched by the same vital disturbance and follow a ‘song’ that makes them think and feel and act in a way that is unhealthy for themselves and their environment. And I hope that this homeopathic way of seeing a collective crisis could be helpful.
In the end, the main point is that we are all part of one and the same community and should try and show as much solidarity as possible with each other's issues and perspectives. Even though we may differ a lot in the way we feel or see the world, we can learn to treat each other with respect and live in peace—I hope.