Hering Law Of Cure


Hering Law Of Cure

What is nature law of Cure?

 The stronger will annihilate the weaker one / a weaker disease is automatically removed if the patient contracts a similar but stronger disease.  this phenomenon is known as The Homeopathic Law of Nature or The Nature’s Law of Cure.

What did Dr Hering do for homeopathy?

For a better experience, click the icon above to turn off Compatibility Mode, which is only for viewing older websites. Constantine Hering, M.D., the father of homeopathy in America, was born on January 1, 1800 in Oschatz, Saxony, in Germany. In 1817, he began studying medicine at a surgical academy in Dresden. By 1820, he was enrolled at the University of Leipzig and during his studies there, he turned to homeopathy after injuring himself during a post-mortem examination.

Refusing the traditional treatment of the time – amputation – he turned to homeopathy and was healed. Hering became a practitioner of homeopathy and was a great advocate for Samuel Hahnemann, the father of homeopathic medicine. In 1826, he graduated from the University of Wurzburg with a doctor of medicine.

He then spent the next 7 years in South America researching zoology and botany on the orders of the King of Saxony. Hering, however, continued working in homeopathic medicine at hospitals and a leper colony. In 1833, he immigrated to the United States and opened his own medical practice. A homeopathic medicine case, likely Hering’s Homeopathy is based on the principle that ‘like cures like’ – so a substance which causes symptoms in large doses will treat those same symptoms in small doses. Just as drinking several cups of coffee might make you stay up all night, taking the essence of coffee in small, highly diluted doses will help you sleep more easily.

  • While this may sound counter-productive, the concept of ‘like cures like’ is sometimes used in traditional medicine, like using small amounts of pollen to de-sensitize a person allergic to it.
  • The idea of treating like with like dates as far back as Hippocrates, an ancient Greek physician who lived from 460 to 377 B.C.E.

He is known as the father of western medicine. When Samuel Hahnemann discovered this method of treatment in the 19th century, he embraced it as an alternative the harsh medical treatments of the time, which often included blood-letting and purging. It is not difficult to see why Constantine Hering turned to homeopathy when he was at risk of losing a limb. Hering, ca.1850s Once in Philadelphia, Hering founded the Hahnemannian Society of Philadelphia. He promoted the use of homeopathic medicine and, in 1835, along with several other doctors, he founded the North American Academy of Homeopathic Medicine in Allentown, Pennsylvania – the first homeopathic medical school in the United States.

The Allentown Academy remained open until 1842. In 1838, the Homeopathic Medical Society of Philadelphia was founded. The Homeopathic Medical College of Pennsylvania opened in 1848 and in 1867, Hahnemann Medical College opened, both in Philadelphia. The two schools merged in 1871. Constantine Hering also published several scholarly journals, including the American Journal of Homeopathy (1835) and the Philadelphia Journal of Homeopathy (1852).

He wrote several books as well, like his The Logic of Homeopathy (1860s). Hering continued practicing homeopathic medicine until his death in 1880. Hering in his study, ca.1870s The Legacy Center holds Hering’s papers as well as those of his son-in-law, Calvin Knerr, who took over Hering’s practice after his death. The finding aid for this collection can be found here: Constantine Hering and Calvin B.

What is the direction of healing?

In an acute situation, where the complaint is of recent onset and the person has no previous history of chronic disease, homeopathic treatment invariably works with great success (providing the medicine is accurately chosen). – Recent symptoms abate and the afflicited individual is returned to their previous state of good health.

The storm that may have been life-threatening passes without trace. In the case of chronic disease the story of how health is restored is more complex and the duration of recovery usually in direct proportion to the length of time that the illness was present. There is no way of predetermining what this will be as each one of us differs, however we can say that long-term illness requires time to heal.

We can also make observations about how cure proceeds. For example, the first symptoms to appear will be the last to resolve, while the most recent symptoms will be the first to disappear. The original symptoms may have manifested a very long time ago! Cure tends to proceed: • from more recent to older symptoms • from vital organs to less vital organs • from the centre to the circumference • from above downwards As well as symptoms disappearing in the reverse order of their appearance, healing often proceeds from within the organism and extends outwards. Healing often progresses from more important organs to less important organs, thus the health of the heart or brain improves before that of less vital organs like the stomach or joints, or someone’s asthma clears up before their itchy skin does. Healing often follows a downward course, from head to foot.

This pathway of symptom movement may be understood by remembering that the head houses the brain, arguably the most important organ, so this will be protected above all else and be the first to heal. If a disease is left untreated it moves in the opposite direction, progressing from surface to centre and from less important to more important organs.

New symptoms are seen as it progresses. This allows a clear distinction to be made between disease and healing processes. Using these principles the homeopath can track the progress of the disease and the health of the patient and can recognise when treatment is progressing successfully.

What is an example of like cures like?

Homeopathy – MRHS Like energy medicine, homeopathy may be one of the most difficult areas for the Western allopathic physician to comprehend. Homeopathy includes several tenants and theories that are antithetical to Western thought. Homeopathy is derived from the Greek words homoios, which means similar, and pathos, which means suffering.

  1. The German physician Samuel Hanneman, for whom the US medical school is named, developed homeopathy.
  2. In the United States homeopathic medicines are recognized and regulated by the Food and Drug Administration due to their long history of use in this country.
  3. In fact, the first United States Pharmacopoeia of Homeopathic Medicine was published in 1897.

Like many things in science, Dr. Hanneman discovered homeopathy by serendipity. He was studying the bark of the cinchona tree known for its ability to treat malaria. Dr. Hanneman did not have malaria at the time that he was experimenting with this bark. He ingested some and noted that it caused symptoms very similar to malaria.

Like cures like, known as the law of similars The greater the dilution the greater its potency, known as the law of infinitesimal dose An illness is specific to the individual.

Looking more closely at “like cures like”, Dr. Hanneman said, “Each individual case of a disease is most surely, radically, rapidly, and permanently annihilated and removed only by a medicine capable of producing (in the human system) the most similar and complete manner of totality of the symptoms.” It is interesting to note that Hypocrites articulated this “law of similars” in the 4th century BC after his long study of the treatment of disease with herbs.

It was also the basic theory used by Edward Jenner, Jonas Salk and Louis Pasteur during the development of the theories of immunization. One example of “like cures like” is the treatment of allergies. In an individual allergic to cat dander, small amounts of cat dander are injected into the patient which over time causes resolution of symptoms.

The most controversial aspect of homeopathy is the second law, the “law of infinitesimal dose”. It is felt in homeopathic circles that the more dilute a remedy, the greater its potency. In some cases, homeopathic remedies are diluted to such a point that it is unlikely that any active ingredient remains in the remedy.

This of course has been the main criticism of homeopathy. Recently, however, research by the German biophysicist, Dr. Wolfgang Ludwig, has shown that the hydrogen bonding angles of the solvents used in preparation of homeopathic substances is different than native water. He theorizes that homeopathic substances may carry some electromagnetic signal or other information carrying capacity.

The third law in homeopathy is that “an illness is specific to the individual”. In other words, a cold is not a cold. Each cold is unique to the individual who has the cold. It is those unique symptoms that should be exploited through the “law of similars” in order to most completely eradicate that cold.

The Homeopathic Materia Medica, is a book that lists not only remedies, but also exhaustive lists of symptoms associated with those remedies. The goal of homeopathy is to carefully match a person’s global symptoms complex with a specific medicine. The closer the match, the greater the likelihood of a successful outcome.

Dilutions are chosen by the degree of match. The poorer the match of symptoms, the lower the dilution. In other words, the more medication is given. The more precise the match, the higher the dilution, the less substance is actually given. Another important aspect of homeopathy is what has come to be known as Herring’s law.

  • Dr. Constantine Herring is felt to be the father of American homeopathy.
  • It was his observation that the healing process progresses from the deepest part of the body to the extremities, from the emotional and mental aspects to the physical, and from the upper part of the body to the lower part of the body.
You might be interested:  Ear Pain Drops For Adults

Healing also progresses in a reverse chronological order, from the most recent maladies to the oldest. By understanding Herring’s law, homeopaths are able to determine if their patients are indeed improving or if they are developing new illness patterns.

Why is homeopathy so effective?

The evidence on the effects of homeopathy – There have been several reviews of the scientific evidence on the effectiveness of homeopathy. In 2010 the House of Commons Science and Technology Committee said there’s no evidence that homeopathy is effective as a treatment for any health condition.

There’s no evidence behind the idea that substances that cause certain symptoms can also help treat them. Nor is there any evidence behind the idea that diluting and shaking substances in water can turn those substances into medicines. The ideas that underpin homeopathy aren’t accepted by mainstream science, and aren’t consistent with long-accepted principles on the way the physical world works.

The Committee’s 2010 report on homeopathy said the “like cures like” principle is “theoretically weak”, and that this is the “settled view of medical science”. For example, many homeopathic remedies are diluted to such an extent that it’s unlikely there’s a single molecule of the original substance remaining in the final remedy.

In cases like these, homeopathic remedies consist of nothing but water. Some homeopaths believe that, as a result of the succussion process, the original substance leaves an “imprint” of itself on the water. But there’s no known mechanism by which this can occur. The 2010 report said: “We consider the notion that ultra-dilutions can maintain an imprint of substances previously dissolved in them to be scientifically implausible.” Some people who use homeopathy may see an improvement in their health condition as the result of a phenomenon known as the placebo effect.

If you choose health treatments that provide only a placebo effect, you may miss out on other treatments that have been proven to be more effective. Page last reviewed: 07 April 2021 Next review due: 07 April 2024

Does homeopathy really work?

When homeopathy is used – Homeopathy is used for an extremely wide range of health conditions. Many practitioners believe that homeopathy can help with any condition. Some of the most common conditions that people seek homeopathic treatment for are:

asthma ear infections hay fever mental health conditions, such as depression, stress and anxiety allergies, such as food allergies dermatitis (an allergic skin condition) arthritis high blood pressure

There is no good-quality evidence that homeopathy is an effective treatment for these or any other health conditions. Some practitioners also claim that homeopathy can prevent malaria or other diseases. There is no evidence to support this and no scientifically plausible way that homeopathy can prevent diseases.

Can homeopathy reverse hearing loss?

Hearing and homeopathy – The body’s natural healing system is believed to be activated by homeopathic treatments. But hearing loss doesn’t ever heal. These hairs won’t grow back. The best course of action, if you’re noticing early hearing loss, is to call us for a hearing examination.

What are the 4 types of healing?

Types of wound healing: Primary, secondary, tertiary, and stages.

Where is the fastest place to heal?

Closed up – Small wounds made in arm skin (top row) took more than six days to heal, but wounds in the mouth (bottom row) closed quickly with no scar. A probe marked in millimeters (black and white bar) shows how big the wounds are. Blue stitches indicate where the wound was made. R. Iglesias-Bartolome et al/Science Translational Medicine 2018 Knowing how the mouth performs its speed healing may eventually lead to therapies that fix skin sores without forming scars. Because the regulators are involved in many biological processes, including guiding an organism’s development, scientists need to discover which of these processes is important for wound healing, says Luis Garza, a skin researcher and dermatologist at Johns Hopkins School of Medicine.

  • The study may provide some clues.
  • Researchers made small wounds in both the mouths and the inner upper arms of 30 volunteers.
  • The mouth wounds healed about three times as fast as the wounds made in the arm skin — on average at a rate of about 0.3 millimeters a day in the mouth compared with less than 0.1 millimeter a day on the arm.

Reducing amounts of PITX1 and SOX2 in mouth keratinocytes grown in lab dishes altered the activity of genes involved cell movement. Boosting SOX2 levels in the skin of mice shortened healing time — from about nine days to about three. Perhaps it shouldn’t be a surprise that the lining of the mouth and other mucus membranes heal quickly.

Where does the body heal the fastest?

Which Part of the Body Heals the Fastest? – Muscles and tendons generally heal the fastest. These parts of the body recover more quickly thanks to an ample blood supply. The circulatory system provides muscles with plenty of nutrients and oxygen needed for healing. These areas also tend to be cleaner, reducing the risk of infection and providing the ideal environment for a rapid recovery. You can expect speedier healing times in areas like your:

Mouth and tongueFingersUpper torsoFace

What is the word for medicine that cures everything?

A panacea /pænəˈsiːə/, named after the Greek goddess of universal remedy Panacea, is any supposed remedy that is claimed (for example) to cure all diseases and prolong life indefinitely.

What is cure in psychology?

Curing means to eliminate sickness, while healing refers to repairing the body, mind, or spirit. But what’s possible when it comes to mental health? In a world of many possibilities, can one truly be at a place where the mind flows freely and in sync with the ebb and flow of life? Is it possible for the mechanism of the mind to impact the complexities of human experience in a definite and positive way? For those with mental health conditions, the desire is often to be without it — to cure the mind like one cures pink eye or heals a broken bone.

But mental health issues are usually far more complicated. They may come with a plethora of symptoms that may incapacitate or impair an individual’s entire functioning. These symptoms are very real and just as complex as the complexities of life. Mental health professionals often try to use and develop new skills and tools to improve insight into the mind for a chance to heal.

Still, most mental health conditions are considered chronic conditions that are treated and managed rather than cured. Both curing and healing offer a multitude of benefits. The difference can look like the process and the ending of one’s journey. To cure means to be without illness or to eliminate sickness that brings disease.

  • Usually, curing requires help from a physician.
  • The goal is to return the body, mind, or spirit to its original state and to avoid change.
  • Curing may take less time and may be less painful, although it’s an end and total removal of the problem.
  • To heal means to repair or strengthen the body, mind, or spirit.

In a 2015 research paper, Kimberly Firth and other researchers developed an operational definition of “healing,” concluding that it is “a holistic, transformative process of repair and recovery in mind, body, and spirit resulting in positive change, finding meaning, and movement towards self-realization of wholeness, regardless of the presence or absence of disease.” This means that with healing, there is a journey that provides you with the intelligence from your experience.

  1. Healing may involve change and acceptance of that change.
  2. Spirituality may accompany this healing, in that there is patience, understanding, and faith.
  3. While a physician may be involved in healing, it may require more involvement and self-awareness of the person being treated as they use their own resources to grow.

What sets curing and healing apart is the amount of time for the process to occur and the mindset it takes to harness positivity in healing. It’s also important to keep in mind that though the two are different, they can be intertwined for different conditions.

What are the 5 Miasms in homeopathy?

Miasms | Viscum Album | Mistletoe Plant | Homeopath Articles | Dr Melita Dyason In my discussion with you today, I will with the little time available, try to shed some light on a topic that takes many years of study to grasp and comprehend. These notes are only pointers, or a sketch, in which to lead you to some understanding.

Dr. Samuel Hahnemann, the Father of Homoeopathy, used the term “miasm” to describe the trans-generational causes to disease. The word miasm means an obstacle to cure the deeper roots to diseases. It can be traced back generations, to five primary diseases Hahnemann referred to as miasms. The good news is that these predispositions to disease can all be corrected and cleared using homeopathy.

The five miasms are Cancer, Tubercular (TB), Gonorrhoea (Sycotic), Syphillis, and Psora. Miasms alter the ideal genetic blueprint for our health and can affect our entire being, physically, mentally and emotionally.

You might be interested:  Pain Ladder Who
1 2 3 4 5
Skin Gonads Mind Mainly Lungs Cells
Leprosy Syphillis Dementia Consumption Tumour

We now may add a sixth to the list. Bacteria, Staphylococcus & Streptococcus are a common cause of soft-tissue infections e.g. pimples, boils erysipelas, bacterial & tubercular leprosy. Viruses e.g. herpes; Fungi e.g. various forms of tinea; animal mites e.g.

scabies. Sy- or the figwart disease. Primary is the sore. Usually venereal and often congenital. Cancres, Sores on penis, mouth, anus. The excrescences usually manifest themselves first on the genitals and appear usually through a sort of Gonorrhoea. Mental malfunction, Psychiatric disorders, Dementia, Degenerative diseases.

Loss of mental processes characterized by confusion, disorientation, and stupor of varying degrees. Is of bacterial origin. The bacteria can attack any part of the body, but usually attack the lungs. Weakness or fatigue, weight loss, no appetite chills/fever, sweating at night.

A group of diseases in which abnormal cells divide without control. Cells from the malignant growth or tumour can spread through bloodstream or lymph system. Miasms can be either acquired or inherited. One can acquire a miasm, for example, by contacting gonorrhea, say at age 18. When treated with antibiotics, this form of suppressive therapy can cause gonorrhea to go dormant and become active or show up later in life, physically in the form of allergies, sinus, herpes, vaginitis, warts and tumors.

Mental/emotional expression manifests through suspiciousness, jealousy, selfishness or uncontrolled sexual desires. Hence acquired miasms are attained during our lifetime. The far majority of miasms, however, are inherited. The chances of inheriting miasms, from our family tree, is much greater that what we might acquire in our own lifetime.

Inherited miasms can be active or dormant. A miasm that is active actually causes a present symptomatic picture or expression. The best time to consider using a miasm formula is when the symptoms are present. A dormant miasm is one hidden deep within the body, not expressing any of its possible symptoms.

Miasms exist in various layers within the body, as we work at correcting disease and building health, it is like pealing away the layers of an onion. Regular homoeopathic formulas work to strengthen and restore health to the body according to the symptomatic expressions the body is communicating.

When these conditions have tendency to recur or be non-responsive, a deeper acting remedy like a miasm may be needed to more completely correct the condition. As we continue to peal away the disease layers impairing our normal healthy expressions we frequently discover various miasms along the way. Miasm correction is essential to both the restoration of our health and the eradication of disease from our planet.

Miasms are matrixed or integrated into our innermost being, from thousands of years deep into our family tree. Although they are not difficult to correct with homoeopathy, they are not always wiped out in a single blow. Disease patterns are trapped in and throughout the layers of our lives.

These layers are like clear overlays. The Cancer Miasm has two sides emotionally. On one side, you can feel low-spirited and hopeless. It can make you feel like your condition will never improve. This can sometimes trigger anxiety and even fear especially regarding one’s health. You can feel overwhelmed, irritable, a victim of circumstances, and overly serious.

On the other side, there is a sort of martyr or manic aspect, that is, you can find yourself taking care of everyone but yourself. You can suddenly feel a burst of energy and clean the house, cabinets, and yes, even the garage. Sometimes this part of the cancer miasm allows you no rest until you catch up on old business such as paperwork or mountains of chores that have accumulated for some time.

On the physical side, you may notice more tiredness, achingness, and headaches. Commonly, pains are more predominant with the Cancer Miasm, that is, sometimes the body simply hurts more. It has an affinity for the digestive tract so there may be stomach or elimination problems. The Cancer Miasm also has a special craving for ice cream and chocolate! Another good reason to remove the Cancer Miasm is that it controls the health of one’s personal finances.

People with strong Cancer Miasms have “poverty consciousness”, that is, they worry about money, as there is never enough of it. They seem to just make it from one paycheck to the next. Once this miasm is removed, these feelings of restriction change as the individual feels more expanded, free, and affluent.

Mistletoe is a parasitic plant. It does not grow in the soil (not the species referred to by Steiner) but in the bark of trees. It grows perpendicular to the branch in which it thrusts its sucker, and it does not obey many of the laws of the plant kingdom. For instance, its berries ripen in winter, without warmth.

It stores up chlorophyll and is green all year long and is indifferent to light. It is thus neither, geotropic or phototropic and this is the fact that fascinated Anthroposophical researchers Kaelin and Leroi.

What are the 3 Miasms of homeopathy?

Introduction – The theory of miasms was first presented by Dr. Hahnemann in his work The Chronic Diseases, their Specific Nature and their Homeopathic Treatment, 1 published in 1828 when he was in his 70s. Based on his observations from a lifetime in medicine as a doctor then homeopath, the book asked profound questions about the nature of health and disease.

It is our purpose in this paper to revisit Hahnemann’s miasm theory and shed light on its historical development over the following 100 years through the writings of the “Old Masters”, to re-evaluate miasm theory’s relevance to modern day homeopathic theory, teaching and practice. Hahnemann brought to light how syphilis and gonorrhoea, as well as infectious skin eruptions like scabies, ringworm, leprosy and all non-self-limiting infective cutaneous infections, remained within the organism and spread deeper until they caused the patient’s final morbidity.

It was already accepted knowledge that these diseases were transmitted from person to person with the help of a certain infectious principle or agent, which at that time was called a ” miasma “. However, Hahnemann was the first to identify that in no situation should the disease be left untreated or, conversely, that the physician simply suppress the initial symptoms; either strategy expedites penetration of the disease deeper into the organism.

  1. Hahnemann also sought to know what was the origin of other “non-venereal” chronic diseases such as asthma, epilepsy, nephritis, arthritis and cancer.
  2. Since he had already realised the basic laws of the pathogenesis of chronic diseases, he began to look for other infectious agents, being completely sure that, as with syphilis and gonorrhoea or “Sycosis” as he named it, after “fig wart” in Greek, there must be further miasms that were able to penetrate the body from the outside.

As Hahnemann developed his understanding, he believed this to be the miasm Psora (scabies), an extremely contagious infection that a person might contract at any given point in their life. To recap, the main postulates of Hahnemann’s theory of chronic diseases were:

  1. All chronic diseases were the result of contamination from the outside: that is, an acute infection left untreated or suppressed.
  2. There were only three contagious miasms: Psora, Sycosis, and Syphilis.
  3. Psora had affected almost everyone on the planet up to that time. Contamination occurred most frequently at childbirth or during breastfeeding. All known chronic diseases belonged to Psora, except for the very limited list of symptoms of syphilis and gonorrhoea.
  4. The first symptoms of infection were always produced by the affected “Vital Force” on the surface of the body. In Psora, there are itching skin eruptions, in Syphilis the chancre sore, and in Sycosis, discharges and urethritis and condylomas.
  5. These cutaneous eruptions and discharges were a compensatory symptom, the “exhaust valve” of a general disease that was affecting the whole organism 2 and should not be suppressed as otherwise internal lesions would develop.
  6. Whilst a patient’s symptoms may vary at different times in their life, all are part of a deeper chronic disease. It is not only senseless, but it may also be harmful to treat these local manifestations as separate and unconnected.
  7. To cure such disease entirely, including its roots, it is necessary to consider its depth and reach, and to do this the homeopathic physician has to carefully collect a thorough case history and select a remedy that covers the maximum number of its current signs and symptoms.
  8. During the dynamic process of cure, with the correct remedy there is an observable pattern of symptom expression: symptoms retreat from internal expression to external expression while those that appeared last begin to heal before those that appeared first (i.e., a skin rash/gonorrhoeal discharge recurs, or a syphilitic scar changing colour).3 4 5

What is the logic behind homeopathic?

Homeopathy, also known as homeopathic medicine, is a medical system that was developed in Germany more than 200 years ago. It’s based on two unconventional theories: ‘Like cures like’—the notion that a disease can be cured by a substance that produces similar symptoms in healthy people.

Which disease has no cure?

Despite advances in modern medicine, sometimes medical conditions cannot be fixed. An advanced, progressive or terminal illness is an incurable, life-limiting condition that is likely to cause a person of any age to die within days, weeks, months or sometimes more than a year.

  1. Dying is an inevitable part of life, but no two end of life situations are the same as death and dying are uniquely personal experiences.
  2. If you have an illness that cannot be cured and will lead to the end of your life, the focus of care will shift from aiming to cure to ensuring you have the best possible quality of life.

This means a focus on:

symptom control independence emotional, spiritual and cultural wellbeing planning for the future.

You might be interested:  Icd 10 Pain

This is not just for people in the last days of life. Care at the end of life can be provided for a few weeks or months, or extended over several years. It is available for everyone regardless of age, culture, background, beliefs or where you live. Some of the common medical conditions of people requiring care at the end of life include:

cancer dementia, including Alzheimer’s disease advanced lung, heart, kidney and liver disease stroke and other neurological diseases, including motor neurone disease and multiple sclerosis Huntington’s disease muscular dystrophy HIV/AIDS other degenerative or deteriorating conditions relating to ageing.

Find more information about treatment and care towards the end of life, Use this tool to search for more information about specific conditions,

What is the meaning of by nature law?

What Is the Theory of Natural Law? – Natural law is a theory of ethics that says that human beings possess intrinsic values that govern our reasoning and behavior. It states that there are universal moral standards that are seen across time periods and societies because these standards form the basis of a just society.

What is the summary of nature cure?

This book gives a deep insight into the world of nature cure. It emphasizes the importance of nature in keeping humanity free from diseases and live a healthy life. According to the author, the only cure to any disease is the restoration of health back to normalcy by living in tune with laws of health.

What is the explanation of law of nature?

law of nature, in the philosophy of science, a stated regularity in the relations or order of phenomena in the world that holds, under a stipulated set of conditions, either universally or in a stated proportion of instances. (The notion is distinct from that of a natural law —i.e., a law of right or justice supposedly derived from nature.) Laws of nature are of two basic forms: (1) a law is universal if it states that some conditions, so far as are known, invariably are found together with certain other conditions; and (2) a law is probabilistic if it affirms that, on the average, a stated fraction of cases displaying a given condition will display a certain other condition as well.

In either case, a law may be valid even though it obtains only under special circumstances or as a convenient approximation. Moreover, a law of nature has no logical necessity; rather, it rests directly or indirectly upon the evidence of experience. Laws of universal form must be distinguished from generalizations, such as “All chairs in this office are gray,” which appear to be accidental.

Generalizations, for example, cannot support counterfactual conditional statements such as “If this chair had been in my office, it would be gray” nor subjunctive conditionals such as “If this chair were put in my office, it would be gray.” On the other hand, the statement “All planetary objects move in nearly elliptical paths about their stars” does provide this support.

  • All scientific laws appear to give similar results.
  • The class of universal statements that can be candidates for the status of laws, however, is determined at any time in history by the theories of science then current.
  • Several positive attributes are commonly required of a law of nature.
  • Statements about things or events limited to one location or one date cannot be lawlike.

Also, most scientists hold that the predicate must apply to evidence not used in deriving the law: though the law is founded upon experience, it must predict or help one to understand matters not included among those experiences. Finally, it is normally expected that a law will be explainable by more embracing laws or by some theory.

Thus, a regularity for which there are general theoretical grounds will be more readily called a law of nature than an empirical regularity that cannot be subsumed under more general laws or theories. Universal laws are of several types. Many assert a dependence between varying quantities measuring certain properties, as in the law that the pressure of a gas under steady temperature is inversely proportional to its volume ( see Boyle’s law ).

Others state that events occur in an invariant order, as in ” Vertebrates always occur in the fossil record after the rise of invertebrates,” Last, there are laws affirming that if an object is of a stated sort it will have certain observable properties.

What is the nature law argument?

The Natural Law Argument Next: The Argument from Up: Critique on Russell. Previous: The First Cause The Natural Law argument states that the observation of governing laws and existing order in the universe indicates the existence of a superior being who enacted these laws. Russell’s criticism to this argument begins by noting that “,

  1. A great many things we thought were natural laws are really human conventions ”.
  2. He next mentions that if one examines the world closely, one finds that there are no real laws, all phenomena “,
  3. Are statistical averages of just the sort that would emerge from chance.
  4. ” He gives the example of getting two sixes upon rolling dice and notes that the frequency of this happening about once in every thirty-six throws is not an evidence of design, but rather of the lack of one.

He concludes from this that The laws of nature are of that sort as regards a great many of them. They are statistical averages such as would emerge from the laws of chance; and that makes this whole business of natural law much less impressive than it formerly was.

He agrees that a statistical interpretation of the the laws of the universe might represent a momentary state of science. However, he asserts that “ the whole idea that natural laws imply a law giver is due to a confusion between natural and human laws ”. He considers human laws to be those that command people to behave in a certain way, and the natural laws to be a description of how things behave in reality.

He reasons that from natural laws, you cannot argue that there must be somebody who told them to do that, because even supposing that there were you are faced with the question, ‘Why did God issue just those natural laws and no others?’ If you say that He did it simply from his own good pleasure, and without any reason, you then find that there is something which is not subject to law, and so your train of natural law is interrupted.

If you say, as more orthodox theologians do, that in all the laws which God issues He had a reason for giving those laws rather than others – the reason, of course being to create the best universe, although you would never think it to look at it – if there was a reason for the laws which God gave, then God Himself was subject to law, and therefore you do not get any advantage by introducing God as an intermediary.

You have really a law outside and anterior to the divine edicts, and God does not serve your purpose, because He is not the ultimate law-giver. The first criticism concerning “human conventions” is invalid because it concerns a specious definition of law.

If someone defines three feet to a yard as a natural law, then the definition is incorrect and therefore does not fall within the domain of our argument concerning natural laws. The crux of Russell’s argument, i.e the statistical dependence of natural phenomena as they are understood today can be attacked by considering the statistical nature of the universe to be a law itself.

Such a change in the point of view would be tantamount to the Kuhnian paradigm-shift that heralded the transition from Classical to Quantum Physics. The disciplines of Statistical and Quantum Mechanics, and all their derivatives rest upon the pillars of precise dynamics of probabilistic systems.

An important implication of Russell’s argument is the invalidity of the entire edifice of science, since science rests on the assumption that the world is inherently simple and understandable. Simplicity implies the existence of descriptive relations (laws) and understandibility implies the predictive power of those laws.

Russell’s use of a dichotomy between the human and natural laws is a surmise. Empirical evidence would indicate, contrary to his assumption, that the separation of human and natural laws follows from insufficient knowledge. For example, the earth and the heavens were supposed to follow different laws, but then with the progress of knowledge, people came to the conclusion that both obey the same laws.

  1. Induction on this trend implies a union of the domains of human and natural laws.
  2. His argument about the relation of God to the laws is fallacious.
  3. First of all he asks the question, “Why did God issue just those natural laws and no others?” He assumes, of course, that this question can be answered and gives no reason for his assumption.

Next, from the argument that God enacted certain natural laws through fiat, he concludes that this is impossible since it represents a break in the natural law argument. He is again assuming, without any reason, that natural laws should apply to God. There is no basis for his making this statement.

His next argument which “shows” that God is Himself controlled by a higher law is again erroneous. An important exception to his conclusion is when a certain law is an inseparable attribute of God, and does not exist without Him. He is assuming that the law can be separated from God, but his assumption is without any basis.

His criticism of the Natural Law argument is less plausible than his criticism of the First Cause Argument. Next: The Argument from Up: Critique on Russell. Previous: The First Cause MIT Muslim Students Assoc Wed Aug 27 23:21:38 EDT 1997