Empiricism depends upon observation, experience and pragmatism. It works well for medicine because the very nature of medicine is based upon the greatest good for the greatest number not the greatest good for evey individual. If empirical research and the subsequent experience shows that 95% of people are helped by a procedure or drug and only 5% are not helped, get worse, or die, then it is an acceptable procedure. That’s why they still sell the drugs but publish warnings. A chiropractic adjustment is based upon expecting and achieving 100% results, correcting vertebral subluxation to enable the innate intelligence to be more fully expressed. With an adjustment, it happens every time. Empiricism will never lend itself to 100% results. The reason is that rarely are two people’s experience the same let alone 100% of any given group of people. Since everyone’s experience is different and since chiropractic deals with a law that is immutable, chiropractic and empirical research seem to me to be incompatable. Just a thought.
Hey Joe,
Until someone invents a ” life-o-meter “, I guess we’re out of the empirical realm.
When DD. and BJ. adjusted, they observed, therefore concluded the need for the outside force, their desicions on how and where to deliver the adjustment was primarily based on their previous experience, and their assesment of the success or failure of the application of the adjustment was in terms of the success of their practical application which is pragmatical in nature. The empirical nature of demonstrating effectiveness. The evolution on the understanding of the Chiropractic philosophy has clarified the assesment of success or failure of the adjustment. On a separate note: How do we Quantify 100% of removal/correction of particular Subluxation vs. Reduction of Subluxation on cuantity of interferance at any given moment?
MORE fully expressed vs. FULLY expressed… The rebirth of the Encephaloneuromentipograph (or something like it) the Life-o Meter !!!
Thank you Joe.
Hey Eddy,
I don’t think we can quantify an abstract like mental impulse. Therefor we can not measure the subluxation Which is why chiropractic does not fit in the empirical testing mode. The NEEMG measured nerve conduction not “the message” that was being transmitted (MI). Just as the NCG measured a byproduct of nerve interference (heat) not the actual loss of MI. It seems we must at this point in time be content to understand and apply the principles of chiropractic. We are definition and logic based which is hard to prove or deny. Maybe Joe or Claude or Don or one of the other big boys can add to this but this is what I have gathered from reading this blog. Much like measuring “LIFE”, we can only measure some aspects of it but not life itself.
Steve,
“Be content to understand and apply the principles of chiropractic”.
Steve Jones D.C. –
– Your statement captures the essence of WHO chooses to BE an NTOSC… and the WHY of the WHO choosing to BE a NTOSC is to practice the objective of chiropractic. Period. –
– Thank YOU!
Hey Claude,
I am content brother. The deeper I get and the cleaner it is the more I love it!!!