Organopathy is often regarded as one of the alternate methods of medical practise, having its own set of principles and concepts unique to it. It has been linked to mysticism and the occult, but nevertheless has some scientific basis on most of its methods. This link to the occult and mysticism is probably because its founder, Paracelsus is a well known wise man who delved into astrology, various natural sciences, medicine etc. Organopathy also has also close ties to homeopathy, another alternate method of medicine that believes in the use natural diagnosis and treatment methods. These two alternate medicinal practises have both similarities and differences to each other. Although this is the case, both organopathy and homeopathy work hand in hand in the treatment of disease just like Chinese traditional herbal medications. Unfortunately, organopathy and homeopathy has been also regarded as 'quack practises' by puristic practitioners of modern medicine. This paper sheds light on the similarities and differences of organopathy and homeopathy, their significance to the practise of medicine.
Organopathy is defined as a method of alternative medicine in which it is believed that 'sarcodes' (normally functioning body organs) and 'sarcode derivatives' (secretions from these organs) are in constant harmony and that the disruption of this harmonic will result in organ failure, but the control over the elements could benefit health. It is in a way related to homeopathy and some specialists use organopathic procedures in treating their patients (The ECH, 2003). Both organopathy and homoepathy are seen as alternative treatments similar to the use of Traditional Chinese herbal medicine (Homeopathy, 2005).
Organopathy traces its origins to Paracelsus, a well known wise man who dealt in alchemy, medicine, astrology and in the occult (Paracelsus, 2005). During his time, many were opposed to his studies and endeavours (Dudgeon, 1853). Paracelsus' methods were frowned upon by his peers probably because of the fact that his medicinal practices were not only ahead of his time, but is considered to be advanced even by modern standards. Although this was the case of his practices, he was never closed minded as he also practices other methods, among them the Hahnemannian principle which relies much on the use of medicines for a cure. This makes Paracelsus' methods and other medicinal practices a sort of common ground ("Prescribing on the basis of organopathic remedies." 2005).
Paracelsus believes that there is a certain 'hierarchy' or ranking for the organ systems and that organs work together in uncanny harmony rather than being autonomous units. He called organ systems as 'forces', which he states that they not have influences among themselves but to the external environment as well. Also in his beliefs, organisms are not just connected to the external environment but also to other organisms as well. (Monk-Schenk, 2002). This 'hierarchy of forces' is discussed heavily in Paracelsus' works, as he describes that each 'force' and organ structure has physiological, emotional and spiritual characteristics. And these aspects or characteristics as well as the relationship of organs are used to determine the symptoms and ultimately, the particular