Saturday, 3 October 2020

Some points of Criticism of Hahnemannian Homeopathy by Dr. Richard Hughes ( Hughesian Homeopathy)

Homeopathy is a therapeutic method, an instrument for the selection of the most suitable remedy for each case.

 According to Hughes, "In adopting this method of Hahnemann, we do not necessarily becomes followers of his; we are homeopathists, not Hahnemannians. The steam engine of today is not altogether that of Watt."

  • Hughes rejected Hahnemann’s concept of the vital force, the Psora theory and how homeopathic medicine works. He was also not satisfied about the potency.
  • Hughes denied the scientific background of Homeopathy. He said," Homoeopathy is the grave of science". The science has no existence here and it dies and is buried. Homeopathy is essentially an art and not a science. It was pragmatic and anti-mystical. It is based on the doctrine SIMILIA SIMILIBUS CURANTUR ( not CURENTUR)
  • Hughes compares Vital Force with Protoplasmic doctrine of life which contradicts the term force. According to him every part is equally alive and independently active and  the unity of whole being secured only by the common circulation and nerves.

  • Hughes denied the Law of Similia as a central key as Hahnemann claimed it as a rule of thumb for therapeutic method. He said it often gave the right medicine but  not invariably. For example Hughes thought that allopathy was more effective in some disorders like angina.

  • Hughes believed that medicine should be chosen not only on subjective symptoms but also on the basis of their known pathological effects on human beings & even on animals.

  • Hughes insisted that you should consider the time sequence in which symptoms occur when finding the correct remedy. One should find a remedy with same sequence of symptoms similar to developed disease symptom pattern.
  • Beside his criticism, Hughes attempted to revise & purify the Homoeopathic materia medica, which resulted in his writing  titled 'Cyclopedia of Drug Pathogenesy' in 1884-91 in 4 volumes. Hughes’ intention was to include all the reliable information available in his day apart from that in Hahnemann’s writings (It was a joint enterprise between the British Homoeopathic Society  and the American Institute of Homoeopathy).

  • While compiling the Cyclopedia of Drug Pathogenesy, Hughes decided to eliminate all the proving symptoms that are proved at the potencies above 6C. He said, " It is necessary to understand the pathology created by the remedies on the organic level and it is the pathology level which has to be treated".

  • The homeopath is more acquainted with the Physiology and Pathology, the better for himself and for those in whose aid he works.

  • According to Hughes, Master's thought had changed for worse as evolved over the years. Hughes criticized the rule of 30 potency, which should be used for all purposes, had fossilized Homeopathy most undesirably.
  • He also emphasized that proving's of ‘The Chronic Diseases’ could not have been carried out in the same way as those of ‘The Materia Medica Pura’. So accurate descriptions of the effects of the new medicines could not be relied on.
  • Richard Hughes has opinion that when considering the similarity between the drug and disease action, there should be similarity between generic, specific and individual action of both drug and disease.

1) Generic similarity- The drug should definitely be capable of altering state of health and again the alteration should be in the same intensity and nature as the sickness to which the patient is suffering. In fever the drug should be febrigenic and in inflammation the drug should be an irritant.

2) Specific similarity- Specific morbid state originate as the gradual result of the interaction between the organism and its environment. So specific similarity can be found out by comparing the various common ailments in diseases & drug action by its Seat of action, Kind of action, Nature of the etiology & modifying cause, Character of pain & other sensations and Concomitants. The drug which has these five points are known as pathological similimum.

3) Individual similarity-  Individual similarity can be found by Physical constitution, Mental & moral state of the patient, Conditions of aggravations & ameliorations, Sides of the body and Time of the day at which symptoms occur.

  • According to Hughes, 'Why fundamental cause is useful if causation known? and if medicine that is suitable, not only to the existing symptom-group, but to the miasm also.

  • After explaining Psora theory, Hahnemann rejected all the enquiry into causes the proximate causes. I can only say what it purports to be and what it really is. 7/8ths of the non venereal diseases seemed to have some analogous miasmatic origin. In medical literature, he found various diseases had a history of suppressing cutaneous eruptions among which scabies was main cause. Also this doctrine rests upon the ground of morbid diathesis and is especially associated with cutaneous disorder.
  • Why The Antipsorics are numerous but the Antisyphilitics and Antisycotics are only 3 in all.
  • The bunch of medicines are antipsoric but are not to be used  as temporary intercurrents in the treatment of chronic non-veneral disease just as Mercury only to be given in syphilis and Thuja and Nitric acid are to be our sole hope in sycosis.


  1. Nice Post For me and It is a very different blog than the usual ones I visit. From this post , I get more knowledge and I read a lot of interesting content here. Thanks for sharing a knowledgeable post. Homeopathy in Brampton


This is a website dedicated to Homeopathy. Do not post vulgar comments. Do not enter any spam link in the comment box.

Discovery of Homeopathy

Whole of the 18 th century in Europe marked by plethora of theories and hypothesis concerning the nature of disease and its causation ⇩...