▁of ▁the ▁same ▁underlying ▁disease ▁( th ese ▁being ▁considered ▁different ▁dise ases ▁in ▁the ▁static ▁Lin ne an ▁nos ology ▁of ▁material istic ▁medicine ). ▁ ▁H ahn emann ▁also ▁understood ▁that ▁there ▁was ▁an ▁element ▁of ▁fix ity ▁and ▁vari ability ▁to ▁disease ▁( found ▁in ▁his ▁distinction ▁( 1 7 9 6 ) ▁between ▁primary ▁( ton ic ) ▁and ▁secondary ▁( path ic ) ▁dise ases , ▁just ▁as ▁Go ethe ▁accepted ▁a ▁degree ▁of ▁form ▁and ▁structure ▁at ▁the ▁physical ▁level ▁whilst ▁pointing ▁to ▁the ▁underlying ▁dynamics ▁leading ▁to ▁new ▁forms ▁over ▁time ▁( D ar win ' s ▁adaptation ). ▁ ▁L ut ze ▁and ▁Schön lein ▁ ▁The ▁works ▁of ▁H ahn emann ▁and ▁Rö sch la ub ▁were ▁continued ▁and ▁further ed ▁by ▁D rs . ▁Arthur ▁L ut ze ▁and ▁Johan ▁Schön lein ▁( 1 7 9 3 – 1 8 6 4 ) ▁respectively . ▁L ut ze ▁( 1 8 1 3 – 1 8 7 0 ) ▁took ▁the ▁found ations ▁of ▁H ahn emann ' s ▁approach ▁to ▁disease ▁and ▁placed ▁it ▁on ▁a ▁solid ▁rom antic ▁foot ing ▁in ▁cons ci ously ▁and ▁consist ently ▁applying ▁dual ▁rem edy ▁pres cri bing ▁( ton ic ▁and ▁path ic ▁disease ▁associations ▁in ▁a ▁given ▁patient ). ▁ ▁Where ▁H ahn emann ▁had ▁hes itated ▁and ▁eventually ▁with d rew ▁his ▁public ▁support ▁in ▁the ▁ 5 th ▁edition ▁of ▁his ▁Organ on ▁der ▁Heil k unst ▁for ▁dual ▁rem edy