We have all wondered why homeopathy is not a more popular form of medicine. Even taking into consideration our own prejudices, homeopathy is one of the most effective medical therapies being practiced. From treating serious pathology and acute infectious illnesses, to the subtlest levels of psychological evolution, homeopathy has a potential answer. Therefore, why isnt it practiced successfully on every street corner? Have we explored all the answers to this?

We know the most obvious reasons the political swing toward allopathy at the turn of the 20th century, the divisions within the homeopathic profession, the Flexner Report (in the USA) in 1910, the advent of more effective allopathic drugs, the dominance of a mechanistic view of the world all of these are valid reasons but perhaps we can take a look at this question from another perspective.

The goal of this essay is to analyze the underlying patterns of homeopathic history in an attempt to understand our situation better. In order to see how the evolution of homeopathy over 200 years has taken place, it is useful to look outside of the field of homeopathy, to explore broader patterns of cultural, social and philosophical evolution and from this to see how this has impacted homeopathy. Nothing exists in a vacuum. So much has happened within all world cultures since Hahnemanns time that has profoundly affected us all, including our understanding of homeopathy.

There is a polarization within homeopathy between the thread of tradition with the original thoughts and conclusions of Hahnemann and his followers, and the movement to push the boundaries of homeopathic practice, incorporating both new and old philosophies and methods. There has always been various ways of applying the Law of Similars, some more esoteric than others and this has consistently challenged the unity of the profession and some would say the very existence of homeopathy. My main purpose is to show that these various methods and philosophies are a reflection of much broader societal shifts that affect our perception and understanding of what we are doing as homeopaths. It can give us a perspective as to why Hahnemann drew the conclusions he did in his time and why there may be different conclusions drawn today. In some ways, Im not talking about different methodologies, but different conclusions and rationalizations of what we are doing, that reflect the prevailing philosophies of the day. I am also looking at how this may help us in bringing homeopathy to a larger audience, how by looking at our own "stuff" we can help integrate homeopathy more effectively into the community. This is especially the case when exploring the areas of personal, spiritual development and how our own personal evolution can impact homeopathy at large.

One of the most original thinkers in the last 20 years has been Ken Wilbur. He has developed a map of human evolution, synthesizing the work of many thinkers and disciplines. He has been able to merge a huge amount of knowledge - from eastern religion to western spirituality, from developmental psychology, physics, sociology and politics and to be able to write about it in an accessible way.

His goal is to create an "integrated" view of human evolution, one that includes both cultural and social evolution along with a spiritual dimension of human potential. In doing this his model of evolutionary thinking can be used to analyze and understand many issues facing our world today and to see how this knowledge can help give a more holistic understanding to the complex issues facing humanity. He acknowledges there have been many other thinkers that have developed various evolutionary models, but many he feels stay within a "flatland" or "horizontal" approach in that they dont incorporate a "vertical" approach that acknowledges the evolution of human consciousness within a truly integrative model of evolution.

Wilbur has written extensively on these ideas in the following books: Sex, Ecology and Spirituality, A Brief History of Everything and A Theory of Everything, amongst others.

The first book is his opus in many ways, the other two being a synthesis of some of the major ideas being presented. One of the ideas he elucidates which he borrows from some modern "evolutionary" thinkers, especially Don Beck and Clare Graves, is a model of evolutionary steps, termed The Spiral of Development within which there are 8-10 stages, or "memes". A meme is a word that has been used by various thinkers who are exploring evolutionary stages of development. It is a pattern or dynamic that constitutes a collective theme. Each of these stages pertains to a period of evolution. A color is given for each meme, although each color given does not have any real significance. The stages are as follows:

Beige: Archaic-Instinctual. This stage is on the level of basic survival; food, warmth, water, sex etc. The key motive is survival. This stage is seen in first human societies, newborn infants, senile elderly, late-stage Alzheimers victims, starving masses, etc. He approximates this consists of 0.1 of the adult population of the world, with 0 percent of the power.

Purple: Magical-Animistic. The forces at play here are magical spirits, good and bad, animistic, where ethnic tribes are formed. The spirits exist in ancestors and bond the tribe. Kinship and lineage establish political links. Although it may seem holistic, it is atomistic: "There is a name for each bend in the river but no name for the river."

This stage is seen in belief in voodoo-like curses, blood oaths, ancient grudges, family rituals, magical ethnic beliefs and superstitions, strong in third world settings, gangs, athletic teams and corporate "tribes." It has 10 percent of the population and 1 percent of the power.

Red: Power Gods. First emergence of a distinct self from the tribe: powerful, impulsive, egocentric, heroic. Magical-mythic spirits, dragons, beasts, and powerful people. Archetypal gods and goddesses, powerful beings, forces to be reckoned with, both good and bad. Feudal lords protecting underlings in exchange for obedience and labor. The basis of feudal empires power and glory etc.

Where seen: the "terrible twos", rebellious youth, frontier mentalities, feudal kingdoms, epic heroes, James Bond villains, gang leaders, New Age narcissism, wild rock stars, Attila the Hun, Lord of the Flies. It has 20 percent of the population and 5 percent of the power.

Blue: Mythic Order. Life has meaning, direction and purpose, with outcomes determined by an all-powerful Other or Order. This righteous order enforces a code of conduct based on absolutist and unvarying principles of "right" and "wrong". Violating the code or rules has severe repercussions. The basis of ancient nations. Rigid social hierarchies, paternalistic; there is one right way to think about everything. Law and order; impulsivity controlled by guilt; concrete-literal and fundamentalist belief; obedience to the rule of order: strongly conventional and conformist etc.

Where seen: Puritan America, Confucian China, Dickensian England, Singapore style discipline, totalitarianism, codes of chivalry and honor, religious fundamentalism, "moral majority", patriotism. It has 40 percent of the population and 30 percent of the power.

Orange: Scientific Achievement. The self escapes from the herd mentality of blue, and seeks truth and meaning in individualistic terms hypothetico-deductive, experimental, objective, mechanistic, operational, and scientific in the typical sense. The world is a rational and well-oiled machine with natural laws that can be learned, mastered and manipulated for ones own purposes. Highly achievement oriented. The laws of science rule politics, the economy, and human events; market place alliances; basis of corporate states.

Where seen: The Enlightenment, Wall St, The Cold War, emerging middle classes around the world, cosmetic industry, trophy hunting, colonialism, materialism, secular humanism, liberal self-interest. It has 30 percent of the population and 50 percent of the power.

Green: The Sensitive Self. Communitarian, human bonding, ecological sensitivity, networking. Care for the planet, against hierarchy, emphasis on dialogue, relationships. Basis of value communities. Importance for consensus, reconciliation, human potential, spiritual concerns, egalitarianism, pluralistic relativism, subjective, nonlinear thinking etc.

Where seen: deep ecology, postmodernism, humanistic psychology, liberation theology, cooperative enquiry, Greenpeace, animal rights, ecofeminism, post-colonialism, politically correct behavior, human rights issues, Foucault/Derrida influenced, diversity movements. It has 10 percent of the population and 15 percent of the power.

Wilbur states that after the green meme, human consciousness is poised for a quantum leap into "second-tier thinking". At this point, the possibility of thinking both vertically and horizontally using both hierarchies and heterarchies (both ranking and horizontally). He states that one can, for the first time, vividly grasp the entire spectrum of interior development and thus see that each level, each meme, each wave is crucially important for the health of the overall spiral, instead of seeing each layer or meme separately, which is the condition while still in first-tier thinking.

Each wave transcends and includes its predecessor. This can be seen from a basic microbiological level a cell transcends but includes molecules, which transcend but include atoms. Just so, each wave of existence is a fundamental ingredient of all subsequent waves, and thus each is to be cherished and embraced. Each wave can be activated when necessary. It is not a linear model that once left is never to be returned. Depending on circumstances the dynamics of one model may be more appropriate than another. Wilbur then makes a very important point. "But what none of the first tier memes can do, on their own, is fully appreciate the existence of the other memes. Each of the first tier memes thinks that its worldview is the correct or best perspective. It reacts negatively if challenged, using its own tools whenever it is threatened." He states that with 2nd tier consciousness, there is an appreciation of the necessary roles all the various memes. Even the green meme that seeks to be inclusive and pluralistic does not have a fully integrated and holistic view; it is still putting the pieces together. This is important as 2nd tier thinking prevents seeing each meme in a judgmental hierarchical way but acknowledges the importance of all of them. One other important point to emphasize is that within any system of thinking, all the different memes may be evident at different times and that it is important that each meme can be expressed as a particular system is evolving. Wilbur then describes the next two waves that are 2nd tier levels of consciousness.

Yellow: Integrative. Life is a kaleidoscope of natural hierarchies or holarchies, systems and forms. Flexibility, spontaneity and functionality have the highest priority. Differences and pluralities can be integrated into interdependent, natural flows. Egalitarianism is complemented with natural degrees of ranking and excellence. Knowledge and competency supercedes power, status, or group sensitivity. The prevailing world order is the result of the existence of different levels of reality (memes) and the inevitable patterns of movement up and down the dynamic spiral. It has I percent of the population and 5 percent of the power.

Turquoise: Holistic. Universal holistic systems, holons/waves of integrative energies; unites feeling with knowledge; multiple levels interwoven into one conscious system. Universal order, but in a living, conscious fashion, not based on external rules (blue) or group bonds (green). A "grand unification" is possible, in theory and in actuality. Sometimes involves the emergence of a new spirituality as a meshwork of all existence. Turquoise thinking uses the entire spiral; sees multiple levels of interaction; detects harmonics, the mystical forces, and the pervasive flow-states that permeate any organization. It has 0.1 percent of the population, 1 percent of the power.

Wilbur states that currently second-tier consciousness is relatively rare because it is now the "leading edge" of collective human evolution. In fact, the very premise of this level of consciousness as a possible reality for more than a handful of humans can be questioned. In the annals of history, it can be argued that we are nowhere nearer this stage than say 5,000 years ago, bringing into question the very structure of these hierarchies. According to Wilbur and others, second-tier thinking has to emerge in the face of much resistance from first-tier thinking. In fact, a version of the postmodern green meme, with its pluralism and relativism has actively fought the emergence of more integrative and holistic thinking. Yet, without second-tier thinking, humanity is destined to remain victim of a global "autoimmune disease" where various memes turn on each other in an attempt to establish supremacy. This is why so many arguments are not really a matter of the better objective evidence, but of the subjective level of those arguing. No amount of orange scientific evidence will convince blue mythic believers; no amount of green bonding will impress orange aggression etc. Scientific materialism (orange) is aggressively reductionistic toward second-tier constructs, attempting to reduce all interior stages to objective neuronal fireworks. (Doesnt that relate to our experience trying to validate homeopathy?). Green accuses second-tier consciousness of being authoritarian, rigidly hierarchical and patriarchal. Green has been in charge of cultural studies for the past three decades and although it has embraced a more pluralistic, inclusive and holistic-ish agenda, it still resists the movement toward a more holistic, integral consciousness. It essentially embraces "subjectivism" where the domain of truth lies within individual personal experience "I have my truth and you have yours". Wilbur quotes one of the modern "integral" theorists Clare Graves as saying "This system sees the world relativistically. Thinking shows a radical, almost compulsive emphasis on seeing everything from a relativistic, subjective frame of reference." In academia, this has been the dominant school of thought, influenced by deconstructionist thinkers such as Foucault and Derrida.

One of the strongest points Wilbur makes of the downside of the green meme is the tendency to narcissism, which he terms "Boomeritis." He feels this condition has seeped into the popular culture to a large degree and instead of an evolutionary cycle toward less self-interest and "declining egotism" which he sees as an evolutionary expression, narcissism creates more self-interest and pathological egocentricity. Much of what is seen in popular culture is affected by this dynamic today. A good example is the obsession of the personalities of politicians and the cultic adoration of pop singers and actors.

During times of transition from one meme to another, there is always potential for both growth and a negative backlash due to the insecurities and threats that are perceived by the dominant powers of the time. This is constantly happening throughout the world, both on a planetary level as well as a multitude of smaller levels, from an individual to a nation. One could make the argument that the current regime in the United States represents a coalition of blue and orange meme power, insisting on its supremacy in the threat of a more global, green development where the old political and economic hierarchies are challenged. This is what makes this time so challenging. Some political analysts support this dominance though based on the premise that a breakdown in order will only lead to a regressive tribalism away from the stability of nation states. However, this analysis does not include a truly holistic paradigm where the internal "spiritual" development of people needs to be included in the evolutionary potential of a shift in old power structures.

The question for homeopathy is how can we analyze the history of homeopathy by using this model. This can be done by looking at the overall evolution of homeopathy and how different aspects of homeopathy reflect different memes or stages. The following analysis is based on the premise that within homeopathy is the potential for a truly holistic "turquoise" expression of consciousness. The fact that homeopathy works according to clear principles and that recognizes a holistic paradigm of reality using the concept of the "vital force" (energetic consciousness) lays the foundation for 2nd tier expression of a truly holistic view. The expression of the homeopathic law is a confirmation of a holistic reality. It is proof of the connection of all phenomena on an energetic level, and that as homeopaths we are actively participating in this conscious process. This holistic view is one reason why homeopathy has not gained the level of respect and recognition that it merits so far. The implications are too radical. Therefore it is not our time yet, but we should work to develop all the myriad parts of the homeopathic profession to the point that its expression on all levels reflects this level of consciousness and potential. This requires the development both within the system of homeopathy itself and the level of individual consciousness that we all bring to our work.

Hahnemann was born at a time when the blue meme was in full swing. The age of enlightenment had begun, with the orange meme appearing on the horizon, but the forces of religious, moral and cultural absolutism were still in charge. There is one right way and one wrong way to think about everything. There are fixed laws and order. Obedience is maintained through guilt, it is strongly conventional and conformist. As mentioned earlier, this meme is seen in Puritan America, Dickensian England as well as totalitarian states. So, although Hahnemann created the system of homeopathy with its green-yellow-turquoise potential, his own dominant influences and references of understanding were that of the blue meme. One can see this in his own writing, in which there is no deviance from the true path, in which the all seeing provider (God) is recognized and which maintains order at all times. I make a distinction here between the philosophical conclusions that Hahnemann made in his writings from the basic principles that he established. Hahnemanns expression and experience of homeopathy was affected by the time in which he lived, one dominated by the "blue" order of things. In this time, there is an absolute view, which seems holistic, as it expresses itself in a God or an order that transcends the individual, but it is still within a horizontal and strictly hierarchical model. Kent further expressed this thinking, and also confirmed the qualities of guilt and sin into the equation ("Man is little better than a moral leper"), stalwarts of blue meme thinking. However, what Hahnemann achieved, based on both blue and orange thinking was to establish a clear paradigm of understanding that defines homeopathic practice. The principles and guidelines he established have stood the test of time and remain as true today as they were then. However, what has changed since then is the language that attempts to explain and integrate the practice of homeopathy into changing frameworks of reference. Also, in attempting to define the boundaries of homeopathy, the profession has been going through its own internal struggles that reflect both individual perspectives and the larger definitions of homeopathic practice.

One of the challenges of homeopathy has been the years of the orange meme, one that homeopathy found hard for any expression. As homeopathy has embraced more the realm of subjective experience (individualization and the role of phenomenological experience) and had its legacy in the thinking of the blue meme, it found it difficult to express the dynamics of the orange meme, and all attempts to validate homeopathy by orange meme methods (double-blind controlled "scientific" trials) have had little impact. One of the ways that homeopathy has attempted to define itself by orange meme methodology can be found in some of the approaches of the "French" school of thinking, which has sought to establish a more objective method of application of the homeopathic law, paying more attention to the symptoms of overt pathology and disease categories. This philosophical and clinical polarization between the subjective and objective aspects of homeopathic practice lie at the root of much of the tension within homeopathy today, but which do reflect legitimate positions on the application of the homeopathic law.

The development of green meme thinking in the last 30 years has coincided with a renaissance in homeopathy, both inside and outside of the medical profession. Many of the new generation of homeopaths come from a green meme generation politically progressive, holistic thinking, vegetarian, interested in eastern philosophy etc. This is why at homeopathic conferences there is often an interesting mix of traditional "conservative" people representing blue meme thinking and then the progressive liberal types representing green meme thinking. You dont see too many "suits" of the orange meme. The commonality between the two memes is the interest in a more spiritual perspective, one that has obvious holistic second-tier implications. Within each meme is the possibility of a movement toward a holistic paradigm but it is constricted within the boundaries of each meme. The blue memes holism is that of a hierarchical authority, be it in God or a strong authority figure. All others are subordinate to this authority. In the green meme, the holism is more a pluralistic acceptance of different ways of thinking and experiencing, which in homeopathy is seen in the various methods of homeopathic thinking and analysis and moving away from the so-called traditional conclusions.

There is currently a big movement in homeopathic thinking inspired by green meme dynamics. Much of the current innovation from original thinkers expresses more "subjective" forms of analysis for example, looking for knowledge of remedy pictures outside of provings, although they would say it is just as objective, merely another method. In so doing, it challenges some of the more traditional tenets and foundations of homeopathy. This expression has then led to a backlash from the "traditionalists" who pay homage to the traditional values and feel that the subjective "interpretations" of some of these homeopaths compromise and betray the "truth" of homeopathy as defined by Hahnemann and the "Masters".

Using Wilburs analysis, one can see how this can happen and how it is part of the evolution of homeopathy as seen as part of a broader social, cultural and philosophical evolution within society as a whole. It is not an isolated phenomenon within homeopathy. Also, it is then obvious that both sides have valid points; there is not just one right way. However, the traditionalists tend to express themselves in more absolute ways consistent with this meme - and are more condemning of the new thinkers, who they feel betray the fundamental tenets of homeopathy. They evoke the spirit of Hahnemann to emphasize their point. The new thinkers tend to be more inclusive, avoid condemnation and take the position of being more accepting, even if they are not.

One of the risks of the new green meme homeopathy is that it can become too subjective, where the analysis becomes the domain of just a few people who may seem to be extremely innovative, but where it is very difficult for this thinking to be translated to a broader application. The quest for continuing innovation and uniqueness may push the boundaries of homeopathic thinking, but at a price of becoming overly interpretative. The original quest for objectivity and scientific rigor, which in a way expressed homeopaths desire for recognition within the orange meme thinking, may seem to be threatened by models of thinking that rely on more anecdotal, metaphorical forms of analysis.

If new thinkers take a position in always seeking to think outside the old paradigms then there is a risk of taking a fixed position that reflects another form of prejudice, no different from the one they are challenging. As Wilbur stated earlier, the development of new ways of thinking and new memes tends to happen by challenging that which preceded it and not recognizing the evolutionary cycle that they are part of. Correspondingly, those that seek to establish a strict hierarchy of homeopathic influence, always seeking refuge in an apparent "halcyon" time of homeopathy, diminish the significance and importance of homeopathic evolution as part of a broader societal evolution.

Based on this analysis, it is important to recognize and be faithful to the traditional forms of thinking and also be open to new ways of understanding that reflect the new memes, which is reflected in new remedies and new methods of analysis and understanding. Even the movement toward understanding remedy patterns as part of families and systems is but one more expression of the influence of the green meme thinking that is looking for a more inclusive interpretation of homeopathic thinking and its holistic implications. It is an attempt to apply homeopathic thinking in the changing consciousness of the planet. As mentioned before, it is not an isolated phenomenon.

The concept of "holism" is central to homeopathic philosophy, yet we can see how different the interpretation of holism has been through the life of homeopathy. In Hahnemanns and Kents days, the holistic paradigm was couched in terms of religiosity, God and morality. The fact of remedies working according to an immaterial force was explained in traditional, if somewhat esoteric terms, but still consistent with the thinking of the day. Today, holism is defined in more green, ecological and pantheistic language, seeing the symbolism between the consciousness of nature and man as expressions of a larger whole that recognizes the connectedness of all things. Writers such as Fritof Capra with his "Web of Life" and Rupert Sheldrake with his "Morphogenetic Fields" express similar thinking as that expressed by some modern homeopaths, looking at "field patterns" of connections between all things. Joseph Chiltern Pearce in his book The Biology of Transcendence describes many aspects of thinking using the concepts of fields. "Use of the word field indicates a habit of our mind to group disparate events, to create from them some unity, a mental category, a taxonomy that lifts the apparent chaos of nature in the order of our thinking." "A field is a kind of universal for its particular category of phenomenon, and the answers or responses drawn from a field are the specifics or diversity of that universal." Some homeopaths even evoke more shamanistic images, evoking the spirit of the purple meme, with its magical-animistic imagery. This is the world where magic spirits, ancestral powers, ethnic tribe etc hold sway. As Wilbur states though, it may sound holistic but is usually atomistic. However, there is a more subjective holism within each meme and this is mirrored somewhat in homeopaths evoking a more shamanistic image of homeopathy. Wilbur states though that a truly integrative holism only occurs in 2nd tier memes, which are distinct from the relative holism of the other memes, even the green one. The challenge for homeopathy is to elucidate and move toward this vision, and not get stuck in disputes and analyses that are limiting to this vision.

The premise for this discussion is the conclusion that within the practice of homeopathy is the potential of a truly integrative model of healing a "new model of healing" one that expresses and synthesizes the scientific and artistic parts of the homeopathic system. In giving the energy pattern of a substance found in nature to resonate with the energy pattern or consciousness of a human being in and of itself expresses the fact of connection, of oneness, of a universal consciousness that clearly examples a unified reality of all things. The whole universe is one conscious whole, with infinite threads of relationship, susceptibility and interaction that create a dynamic, throbbing expression of life. By this equation, all things have a level of consciousness, from a rock at the beach to each human being and to the brightest star in the sky. Homeopathic action is simply the way in which we use the Law of Similars to match these energy patterns together.

The Law of Similars, being a law, necessarily stands alone, outside all our methods, rationalizations and explanations. It is not unique to homeopathic thinking, but exists as a phenomenological reality. Hahnemann elucidated and systematized the fact that this law can be utilized as a healing force. How we find our own way to utilize the Law of Similars is part of the interesting debate today within homeopathy.

Some modern thinkers increasingly understand this holistic concept. In the field of medicine, one of those thinkers is Larry Dossey, well known as the Editor of Alternative Therapies, the peer review magazine for Alternative and Complementary Medicine. In one of his latest books called Reinventing Medicine, he discusses the concept of the non-local mind, with its manifestation as the power of the mind to heal from a distance. He is looking at testing this idea on patients with cancer and heart disease and attempting to verify the effects scientifically. Here, we have yellow-turquoise meme thinking bridging with orange meme scientific verification. Dossey has been influenced by Wilburs thinking as have other progressive thinkers in the medical field. One irony of this development is that quite a few of these people seem to skip over homeopathy, not realizing the philosophical implications of homeopathy. Partly this is because of its mixed-meme metaphors, and its apparent similarities to conventional medicine "giving a pill for an ill." One of the challenges of homeopathy therefore is to reconcile its historical roots with its philosophical implications and to find its place as an integrative holistic system of healing.

Physics has been leaning heavily into the direction of a holistic paradigm for some time, elucidated by thinkers such as David Bohm in his book "Wholeness and the Implicate Order" and Michael Talbot in "The Holographic Universe."

One other factor in this analysis is the role of individual teachers within homeopathy. There has always been a lineage in homeopathy, the influence of individual teachers being paramount in homeopathys evolution. The shadow of Hahnemann is still very strong but in some ways perhaps hovers over the system of homeopathy like a rain cloud as much as it does a beacon of light in the darkness of scientific reductionism. To elucidate this, one of the challenges of homeopathy has been establishing itself as an objective system of healing that is greater than the sum of its parts, or even the sum of its great teachers. The continuing dependence on individual teachers and at times the cult like adoration given to them can act to subsume a more integrated view of homeopathy as an objective system of healing. This tendency has been there since the time of Hahnemann, and although may express itself differently today, still reveals a unique dynamic within homeopathy. It could be argued that homeopathy will truly evolve when the significance of individual teachers is lessened and there is a greater confidence in the system of homeopathy itself

Various teachers within homeopathy will continue to have a unique role to play, in attempting to influence the evolution of homeopathy. However, the tendency for a cultic following to take over the process, an issue stretching all the way back to Hahnemann, may become less over time. This is easier said than done. Many homeopaths are still insecure in their professional and social position and therefore look for authority figures to give necessary confidence. If the motives of teachers is for their own ego gratification, then their impact will be mixed given the integrative paradigm of Wilbur, as the ultimate goal of a yellow-turquoise transition is a movement toward less egocentricity, or a deep recognition of being part of a greater whole.

This is also the case and challenge for homeopathic practitioners. If we accept Wilburs premise that a 2nd tier evolution is predicated on a more spiritual, less egotistical consciousness, then all homeopaths, teachers or not, have to be willing to question their motives and ego attachments. We all have to embark on the journey of self-knowledge and realize that being a healer can be a position of power and authority, a position easily corrupted by an unhealthy ego attachment. However, in 2nd tier thinking, homeopathy itself is limited by our collective inability to rise above the limits of egocentricity and self-delusion. There is a growing awareness of the need for all of us as homeopaths to "know thyself" and accept the spiritual implications of our actions and role as homeopaths. This has obvious implications for our ability to perceive what needs to be cured in a patient and depths of perception necessary to heal people to the deepest levels.

This analysis can be challenged when looking at the reality of our lives. It is definitely possible to be an excellent practitioner and at the same time have some serious delusions about oneself. Being rather egotistical doesnt seem to get in the way of finding the correct remedy and being a sensitive, astute practitioner. However, if there is a movement toward a 2nd tier reality, then the onus our own spiritual evolution does become more significant.

Therefore, the current challenge is to move toward a new expression of holism and integration within homeopathic practice. As we challenge old ways of understanding and have moved toward more subjective thinking and innovation, we will have to move beyond this again to a more complete and new objective understanding of homeopathic practice. This will involve a movement through the more subjective, individualistic expression of homeopathic thinking (green meme) to a holistic understanding of objectivity, one which includes the individual interpretation and experience but sees it as part of a larger truly holistic paradigm. This will be seen in the consulting room where the recognition of the uniqueness of the moment and the interaction between patient and homeopath will be an expression of both the unique "subjective" experience of that situation and the objective reality and "truth" of homeopathy. In other words our ability to perceive what is true will grow and we will be able to rely more on pure experience and not on any fixed theory or ideas. This may take time as the evolution of homeopathy moves through the more subjective green meme influence, but the goal is to understand how we are moving toward an integrated expression of homeopathy, from the dynamics of the consultation to the choice of the remedy and to the changing consciousness and understanding of both patient and healer.

This developing holistic view can be seen from another model that Wilbur has created, a four-quadrant model in which a multidimensional kosmos consists entirely of sentient beings, or "holons", which spans from atoms to amoebas to every human being. All holons can be perceived from at least four fundamental perspectives.

Subjective Objective
"I" "It"
Interior Exterior
Cultural Social
"We" "Its"

The upper left quadrant represents the reality of the subjective "I", the interior reality of the individual. This connects to the realm of the sensation in the patient, the realm of mentals and generalities so important in homeopathy. This is the realm so ignored by allopathic medicine and science in general. Opposite this in the upper right quadrant is the view of the holon from an exterior or objective point of view. This is described as an "it" and is the realm of the objective phenomenon in disease, characterized more as specific symptoms, disease labels, and also the objectification of the internal sensation. This area is more the domain of allopathic protocol but also of homeopathy as it connects to the whole person and expresses part of the whole picture.

The lower left quadrant represents a collective of "holons" as a "We" or "intersubjective" society. This reflects the broader "fields" in which all of us exist and relate to the interdynamic influences that affect our thoughts, ideas and present realities. It is an expression of the interplay between the inner consciousness of the individual with that of the broader family and culture in which we belong. In homeopathy, this can be understood by looking at the sphere of influence of an individuals life, the dynamics that may exist in our biological family or their work environment, the inherited miasms that affect physical and psychological realities and the broader cultural conditioning that influences all of our individual lives. The acceptance of this as part of the homeopathic picture can be very important in seeing an individual person as part of a larger
"gestalt", one which both reflects and expresses the internal "consciousness" of each individual.

The lower right quadrant represents a collective viewed from the outside, as an "Its" or interobjective society. This is less pertinent for homeopathic analysis, more in the realm of sociology and perhaps forms of psychology, but it is the social expression of the cultural dynamics that connect us. As it is part of the whole, it still expresses the consciousness of the individual and the environment in which we all live. It is all part of the holistic paradigm.

In homeopathy, our quest is to explore all these areas as a way of gaining the most complete understanding of the individual. We do not live in isolation, and in seeking a broad and deep view of an individuals life and the challenges that have impacted his/her health, we need to look at all the quadrants to make the correct analysis.

This way of thinking is essential for any truly integral view of reality according to Wilbur.

One other dimension to the changing consciousness within homeopathy is how it may change a homeopaths perception of what needs to be cured and the understanding of how remedies may fit more precisely. As the consciousness of humanity has changed in the last 150 years, the symptoms and disease patterns also have changed, reflecting the new challenges we are all facing. This is more likely in modern urban areas than in rural areas where life has not changed so much and is more manifest in mental and emotional symptoms, which have been the focus of much modern thinking. As homeopaths we recognize that we are connected to the patients we treat. We are not just observers, separated from our patients by a glass wall but share in the shifting patterns of consciousness. As such we are perceiving new dimensions to our understanding and looking toward both new remedies and more refined understanding of existing ones. This is one reason why even veteran prescribers are challenging their own assumptions and why the practice of homeopathy is constantly evolving. Once we stop challenging ourselves, then we are denying that life is evolving and that as homeopaths we are part of this evolution. So, although there is a valid argument that fundamentally nothing has changed in human consciousness and that the same remedies are used throughout the world and in different cultures, an equally strong argument can be made that shifts of consciousness continue to occur, reflecting the fact that life is constantly changing, and is demanding new things from all of us. As we know, symptoms and disease patterns reflect our inability to adapt to these changes, which may require new remedies or new ways of perception to address these situations and to help facilitate further evolution.

The argument of the validity of using any other basis of knowledge outside of legitimate provings for the homeopathic prescription will perhaps become less relevant. Arguments can be made on both sides that both provings and anecdotal/ metaphorical bases of remedy justification are both fraught with interpretation and lack "scientific" rigor. What will become more significant is the investigation of whether it is working in the light of "pure experience." Pure experience is the objective reality of homeopathic action, one that will have to confirmed through the integrity, honesty and objectivity of the homeopath. The goal therefore is the integration of both the rational and empirical threads of homeopathic philosophy and practice, or the subjective and objective dynamics of our experience. This puts that much greater onus on the homeopath to pursue Truth for its own sake and not for his/her own edification, Truth being an expression of Hahnemanns most important statement, the first aphorism of the organon.

Therefore, using Wilburs and other thinkers paradigms of evolutionary theory, with the goal toward a truly holistic, integrative practice, this can act as a focus for the homeopathic profession as it moves in this direction. Understanding that homeopathy is just one part of this evolutionary process can help us see our situation in a much larger context. We need to look outside of our own situation for reference. This can happen when all of us who practice homeopathy begin to express a greater understanding of the fact of a holistic interconnected universe. This has to happen on both an individual and collective level. However, an understanding of an integrative practice will allow us to recognize the interconnectedness between the many facets of homeopathic evolution, both individually and collectively and that as individuals we have a opportunity to express this in both our professional and personal lives.