Ignorance of the philosophy of chiropractic, for whatever reason, precludes the application of it in practice. Yet many students are perfectly willing to attend a chiropractic college that purposely does not teach it. Ignorance is no excuse.
Ignorance of the philosophy of chiropractic, for whatever reason, precludes the application of it in practice. Yet many students are perfectly willing to attend a chiropractic college that purposely does not teach it. Ignorance is no excuse.
They don’t know what they’re missing and they don’t miss what they don’t know.
Perfectly put!
Ignorance is no excuse when one KNOWS that one doesn’t know. Then, it is that person WHO can choose to learn the philosophy or not to learn the philosophy. –
– On the other hand, if one does NOT KNOW that one doesn’t know, HOW is possible for that person to choose WHO that person could choose to be without that choice being made available? –
– Indeed, it is the chiropractors WHO choose to tell the story over and over and over and over and over again… in as many creative ways as doable… WHO make that choice available to everyone regardless of creed, culture, health status or financial ability to pay.
Claude, does not one CHOOSE not to know? The Major Premise is a self evident fact and, as you have so often pointed out, everything is deduced from that. So I would suggest that ignorance is not a matter of luck but a matter of CHOICE. To see the manifestations of universal intelligence everywhere and to choose not to investigate further is choosing not to know, to sit in a chiropractic classroom, learn anatomy and physiology and choose not to study what creates and sustains that anatomy and physiology (innate intelligence) is choosing to understand half the story, to study pathology and not want to understand why the body breaks down, choosing to accept the medical explanation and choosing to look no further is saying I choose to be a medical doctor, not a chiropractor. Try turning off the next movie you watch half way through, then guess the ending and if you are wrong, say its not my fault, I didn’t see the end. That’s true but whose fault is that? Principle No. 17 applies here. How did the chiropractor who called yesterday, a National (where innate and universal intelligence are mentioned albeit in derision) graduate who later became chairman of the board of Sherman make that leap? Because after graduation he did not choose to believe that he knew it all, looked further into the philosophy of chiropractic and became a straight chiropractor. I would suggest that anyone who has ever heard the terms innate or universal intelligence cannot claim ignorance, except, ignorance by choice!
Joseph,
As you suggest “that anyone who has ever heard the terms innate or universal intelligence cannot claim ignorance, except, ignorance by choice!” … they must have heard the terms innate or universal intelligence at least ONCE for them to be conscious of it and then they are free to choose WHO to be in order to find out more about it or NOT! Right? Prior to that “hearing” they definitely did not know that they did not know about those two terms and they could NOT choose WHO to be! –
– Indeed, I still maintain, that it is the chiropractors WHO choose to tell the story (including the terms universal intelligence and innate intelligence) over and over and over and over and over again… in as many creative ways as doable… WHO make that choice available to EVERYONE regardless of creed, culture, health status or financial ability to pay. EVERYONE has to have heard it at least ONCE in order to be able to choose WHO they could choose to be in relation to chiropractic philosophy!
Claude, I’m not sure that people have to know or even hear those terms (ui/ii), just know the concept. We have all had new PMs who listened to the story for the first time and were one step ahead of our explanation. They already had the big idea. I would suggest that everyone has heard or known the big idea, they just rejected it at some point or chose to ignore it for days, weeks , months, years, or forever. I agree with your second paragraph.
Joe and Dr. Lessard,
Great post. Good discussion.
I can understand that the story must be said over and over.
My question: If the first time is done with derision, is it the same story?
Joe, has mentioned ui and ii need not be mentioned. Others contend that the use of subluxation is optional as well.
Do we agree on the salient points necessary for the story and conveyance of the concept?
I would LOVE the answer to this inquiry: What are the 4 criteria necessary for a successful teaching of the story. 🙂
**correction**
Sorry..should have read. Additionally, others contend that use of the term “subluxation” is optional. Other terms used are interference, spinal shifts, spinal occlusions.
Sorry Joe I didn’t mean to imply you said that. I know better. 🙂
I am willing to go deeper into the telling of the story over and over again! How did you come up with 4 criteria? You must have an answer already… and I want to know your what’s on your mind.
What’s on your mind is for Don of course!
Well since you asked my opinion Dr. Lessard.
Here are 4 that I have borrowed from someone more intelligent than
I.
The purpose of chiropractic is to:
1. Keep performance levels at their peak
2. Keep body chemistry in balance
3. Brain, spinal cord and nerves coordinate and maintain control of the glands
4. Keep vertebrae in their proper relationships.
First thought is that this may stir some controversy. Second thought was I should share that this came from someone very knowledgeable but hold the name so we can think this through together.
I like it. Any thoughts?
Don, I have some thoughts about your post of 2013/12/06 at 10:34pm. I think the four objectives that you “borrowed” are worthwhile, beneficial to humanity and they may reflect:
1-the spinology objective, 2-4 the traditional straight chiropractic objective. But they are not the OSC objective. OSC begins and ends with the LACVS to enable the (forces of) the ii of the body to be more fully expressed. Does that always result in 1-4? No. Does it always result in the meeting of the OSC objective? Yes. We are not responsible for the results of our objective, just meeting that objective. The results are up to the ii of the body. After we meet our objective, our job is done and everything else is outside our control. A spinologist and a traditional straight may end up mixing because sooner or later LACVS for better innate expression will not result in the accomplishment of 1-4 (due to Lof M) Or on the other hand he/she may realize that they have done everything one mortal can do for another and become an OSC, not changing their manner of practice just the explanation of the Why of it. P.S. I hope I was not the person you borrowed this from. I’ve said and written some wrong things in my 46 years of explaining chiropractic, forgetting what I’ve said, and this might have been one of them.
Joseph,
What I am understanding of what you are saying is that everyone has “IT” within themselves and it’s up to us to us to educe it from them! That’s good and it implies that the notion of that truth must be made conscious to them one way or another!