The philosophy of chiropractic is part of an ADIO world and life viewpoint which stands in stark contrast to the outside-in viewpoint that is therapeutic care. The practice of chiropractic is not an alternative to medicine – they each have a different objective. Chiropractic is a way of addressing an issue of health (neurospinal integrity). Ouside-in thinking involves addressing the idea of making you think you are healthy. Some people may consider that an alternative. I don’t.
Simply perfect Joseph!
reggie talks about this too. it’s not medicine on one side and all the drugless professions on the other. it’s chiropractic on one side and all the rest on the other, specifically because ADIO philosophy.
Thanks for the reminder Joey. I forgot that talk. I’ll have to listen to it again, steal the message and use it for a future post!:)
There is no alternative to chiropractic, you either get it or you don’t.
You either have your subluxations addressed or you don’t.
You either get adjusted or you don’t.
No alternative.
“Chiropractic is a way of addressing an issue of health”…..and so much more.
Good point Steve! That’s the problem with writing “epigrams”. Unless you are a BJ Palmer, you usually leave something out.
There is no doubt that ADIO is a lifestyle of common sense and healthy practices. Medicine is a necessary and admirable profession when it limits itself to what it is – the treatment of diseases and symptoms. I have practice members still alive because of medical care i.e. kidney transplants, gangrenous amputations, etc., but when we mistake that for everyday life and entrust that mentality to safeguard our health, we are mislead.
Chiropractic and an ADIO lifestyle are not alternatives to anything, they are just intelligent choices and as such it is up to us to educate the public. It is time we recognize the role of the educated mind in health and tell the story!!
While what you say is true, Jim, I think we can mistakenly be led into believing that something therapeutic can restore health. While an amputation or transplant may be lifesaving, it has not restored health. And while the ability to do that may be admirable and necessary, it has not restored wholeness (what I am told is the old english definition of health). Medicine (outside-in) does have its place and is necessary but it only prolongs death and does not add more life/health. I’m okay with that. I’m not okay with mixing any ouside-in approach with an ADIO one. It dilutes and cheapens the ADIO approach (and perhaps the outside-in one also)
Joe, I agree that an outside in procedure can never match what the body can do from the inside out, but I do believe that a life-saving procedure can do more than prolong death and can “enhance your life experience”. (your quote).
Here’s my own case in point. I had been noticing that my vision was getting duller very gradually the last few years until finally after driving for many hours, my eyes were so fatigued that I had to stop. After an eye dr. visit I found I had cataracts that were quite “ripe” so to speak. Now that my original cloudy “cataracted” lens has been removed and a piece of plastic lens that is my prescription has been inserted surgically, my world is bright and clear again. And I have been able to read with more comfort than I can ever remember. I consider this to be quite miraculous since I have been wearing glasses since 3rd grade and now I do not need glasses for distance.
My quality of life has been enhanced with this procedure from the outside in, and it is so much more that just prolonging death.
Terri,
While I am happy for your new found eyesight, what has it done for the health/life of your eyes? Does it still remain that this outside-in procedure is prolonging the “death” of your eyes and of your “seeing”? I believe Joseph is talking in terms of having an ADIO viewpoint here. I rejoice in your improved ability to read and your not needing glasses for distance. Did this outside-in approach made you whole?
Again, outside-in simply CANNOT restore health. Terri, does the innate intelligence of your body control your “plastic” lenses? If not, what controls them? Is this not a permanent state of dis-ease? If so, from your body’s point of view, how can the innate intelligence of the body adapts universal forces of the “lenses” of your eyes?
Thank you for sharing your experience Terri. You have demonstrated the point Joseph was making. I’m okay with the OIBU prolonging death and not adding more life/health. It should not be confused however with the ADIO approach. ADIO and OIBU are completely different view points and should not be mixed. It does not mean that a person should not use an OIBU procedure. It means that if a person does use an OIBU procedure, it comes with a consequence attached to it… namely “lack of coordination” of some of the cells of the body.
You state: “My quality of life has been so much enhanced with this procedure from the outside in, and it is so much more that just prolonging death”. The fact is, that by prolonging the death of your eyes, the innate intelligence of your body has a permanent disconnect from a very necessary part of your health.
And since I had the same procedure done 2 years ago, I LIVE the contradiction of both opposites and I am fine with that. I can NEVER be whole again and this OIBU procedure has altered my life forever
It was my choice for better or for worse. 🙂
Why are we conditioned to think everything OIBU is bad? Is this not why we have an educated intelligence, to help us deal with or relate to the “Outside” environment. Chiropractic was developed with ei, math is ei, our appreciation of beauty is ei, language is ei, this computer is a product of ei. Lets face it, ADIO can only go so far due to the qualities of matter. Our ei is designed to assign value and choose what parts of the (OIBU) universal resource pool we want to interact with. Innate is not the only adaptive mechanism we have. Educated created our house and clothing to help us adapt to our climate and protect us from the wild beasts. Yes we could live wild but would that be the fullest expression of what we are?
The new lens (above) or my mothers stints have improved the quality and probably extended life. Are they ADIO, no. ADIO and OIBU are like night and day, we need them both.
Steve,
OIBU is NOT bad. It simply is not ADIO. When we get down to it, the choice we make every day involves ADIO or OIBU. These choices are personals (preferences, comfort levels, fears, outside pressures, testimonials, etc…) and we use our educated intelligence to determine which way to go.
Very few people even know about ADIO view point. Most people choices are limited to OIBU. For those people, not only are they limited by matter, time and vertebral subluxations…. they are taught to limit themselves even more by the conventional wisdom of their culture. OIBU cannot extend life (as defined by princ.3). As I mentioned above, my ARTIFICIAL “lens” are a PERMANENT disconnect between intelligence and matter and therefore, it is a permanent state of dis-ease, which is death (as define by pri.30). My matter is “vibrating” but it is not “vibrating” adaptatively, IT IS NOT “living” (p.301 art.364 Stepenson”s). Again, this is a philosophical construct from deductive reasoning for us to understand the distinction between the ADIO viewpoint and the OIBU viewpoint. It is totally independent from the quality of “actual” living. It is an elegant choice to be free from vertebral subluxations and always positive regardless of “results” (symptoms, pain, feelings, etc.). Again I am happy for your mom.
It is our responsibility as OSC to inform the public of the ADIO point of view objectively every time we have an encounter with them. It is our mandate to guard well this sacred trust.
I agree with you totally, Claude as far as being very clear about differences between OBIU and ADIO, and being able to clearly define those difference to the public. But I think we as chiropractors come off to the public as being “anti-educated.” Can we not applaud the creativity and ingenuity of people (responding to their God given talents and ideas and expressing those ideas in advancing technology in food, clothing, shelter etc., etc. Yes, some of those innovations can be “anti-life”, but some do enhance our life experience greatly!!!!!! (How I love my garage door opener in the winter.) Here again, I believe it is HOW we communicate this message. We know that what comes from the inside out is truly miraculous. Can we tell this message without making OBIU bad???
“OIBU cannot extend life” is an adjustment not an OIBU force (uf) that ii adapts for constructive value?
Steve,
The adjustment is performed by the innate intelligence of the body. You are correct when you say that when we introduce an educated thrust into the spine, it is a universal force. We must remember that universal forces are destructive as regards to structural matter (pri.26) irrelevant of how educated they are. Again, “as regard” means from the matter’s standpoint. The forces are neither “good” nor bad, they just are.
It is when the universal force is adapted by the innate intelligence of the body and transformed into an innate force that it becomes constructive. That’s how the adjustment comes about. There is just no other way.
OIBU “prolongs” death not life. Only ADIO prolongs life as it is within the second component of the triune (force) that the integrity of the triune is lost. “Life” is the union of intelligence and matter (pri.3). The function of force is to unite intelligence and matter (pri.10).
It’s when there is interference with innate FORCES (pri.29) that the character of those forces are reverted back to universal forces (unadapted) and to their original “destructive” attribute. Vertebral subluxation by definition interferes with the “flow” of mental impulses from brain cell to tissue cell and from tissue cell to brain cell. It is once again as a result of the limitation of matter that dis-ease occurs (pri.30).
With the principles of chiropractic and from deductive reasoning we can conclude that ONLY adapted universal forces (innate forces) will result in a full expression of the innate intelligence of the body (the very objective of chiropractic). 🙂
Steve,
Here is the kicker. If a chiropractor in New Mexico were to give a muscle relaxant drug to a person to relieve their back pain and as the muscles relax the innate intelligence of the body take this “relaxing unadapted outside-in force” and adapts it into an innate force producing an adjustment correcting a vertebral subluxation… would we say that this OIBU procedure fulfilled the chiropractic objective if that was the intention of the chiropractor? Of course we would!!!! As we define our profession by its objective, this is where the philosophy will take us sometimes and I don’t like it at all. I believe the choice that this chiropractor made was a very poor choice of introducing into the body a universal force for the intent of providing the innate intelligence an opportunity to transform that universal force into an innate force. However in that instance, the chiropractor did just that. He fulfilled the chiropractic objective!
Again, I repeat, OIBU will always prolong the death of something. And it’s not good or bad. It is WHAT it is. If it that OIBU procedure (force) becomes adapted by the innate intelligence of the body being transformed into an innate force, then and only then it becomes ADIO and prolongs “life” as we define it in (pri.3).
AMAZING ISN’T IT?
Claude,
BJ once said something to the effect that if you threw your patients down he basement steps, half of them would get well from the EIF being adapted into an adjustment. But I think the issue is, what is the chiropractor’s objective? I seriously doubt whether any New Mexico chiropractoid would be giving a muscle relaxant with the objective of correcting a VS. If by chance he were, you are correct, that would be meeting the objective. However, that would bring up the technique issue, not an issue of objective. In that case, I would tend to go with the basement steps technique rather than the muscle relaxant one… but then I’m really not an authority on the efficacy of techniques. 🙂 One more thought: how does BJ’s statement “chiropractic is either specific or it is nothing fit into this discussion?
Terri,
I guess I’m not making myself clear. My French-Canadian is roaming these days as I speak to my Northern family often. Please forgive me.
OIBU is NOT bad. It is what it is! And it’s not ADIO. I do not understand what makes you think it is bad when I say OIBU is not ADIO. It is the genesis of an elegant choice to promote the ADIO viewpoint. That in itself does NOT make OIBU bad. Both co-exist and I’m okay with that. It is when we “mix” any outside-in approach with an inside-out one that I find “grave” damage is done in practice. To communicate this message to the world with clarity is very important. HOW it is communicated depends on WHO is doing the communicating and to WHOM.
This blog is to engage one another to go DEEPER into the philosophy. By doing so, it is my hope that we will “own”, within the core of ourselves, this philosophy of chiropractic and know its subject with such understanding that we will be able to communicate it to the public without judgment”.
As you know, Terri, only those WHO stay “awake” to the principles of chiropractic, will hold the conflict within themselves of both view points with intensity, and without judgments.
Claude, thank-you for clarifying and challenging my thinking.
In communicating chiropractic with the public, (maybe because of my inability to be clear in the principles) it comes out as as a “right vs. wrong” exchange. Getting the “big idea” clearer and clearer in my mind can truly help in the communication process.
“It is our responsibility as OSC to inform the public of the ADIO point of view objectively every time we have an encounter with them. It is our mandate to guard well this sacred trust.”
Claude, what does your continuing education program consist of to successfully get this across to your pms? Thanks.
Tom,
Come and see!!! 🙂
Joseph,
This question of “specific” looks like you want to stir the cauldron of technique contradictions and I will not fall for it. 🙂
My opinion on this subject comes from a purely philosophical construct even though I know that BJ meant hole (whole) in one when he made this epigram: “Chiropractic is specific or it is nothing”. (This, by the way, was the title of my first talk at Sherman Lyceum in May of 1975. In those days I spoke about there being but ONE dis-ease… there would be but ONE cause… requiring ONE correction… at ONE place… in ONE way… to correct ONE subluxation… which simplified the subject of health, its absence and its restoration.)
Today, when I read the many writings of BJ, I realize how genius he was on so many levels. He had the awesome responsibility to develop the philosophy, the science and the art of chiropractic all at once. Regarding our discussion of universal forces being introduced into the human spine for the “hope” that it will be adapted by the innate intelligence of the body and transformed into innate forces, here’s my take on this specific epigram of BJ:
Today, the OSC clearly understands that there is only ONE intellectuality… THE INNATE INTELLIGENCE OF THE BODY… that DOES know WHAT the normal and perfect position of a vertebra is… WHAT that position was before it was subluxated WHEN it was normal. This LAW or principle if you will, works within the realm of certainty of HOW far and HOW much the subluxated vertebra is out of that perfect setting. Then, a universal force introduced into the human spine, adapted within the realm of certainty by the innate intelligence of the body, will restore with integrity, HOW, WHERE and WHEN to reposition the subluxated vertebra to that normal and perfect apposition with its articular facets, with its correspondents above and below resulting in the full expression of the innate intelligence of the body.
Today, the OSC, with the ADIO view point, desires to work WITH THIS SPECIFIC LAW OF INNATE INTELLIGENCE by LACVS for a full expression of the innate intelligence of the body. The OSC working with this SPECIFIC principle, introduces, with education, a universal force with the SPECIFIC intent to have it used by THIS SPECIFIC LAW for transformation into an innate force, thereby correcting the vertebra to its ABSOLUTE NORMAL position for a full expression of the innate intelligence of the body.