The idea that there is a principle greater than us, that we cannot create a cell, or heal a body is logical. At the same time it is humbling and antagonistic to the ego and pride of the educated mind, so much so that man seems to have a natural inclination toward outside-in approaches that promote the educated and ignore the innate. What do you think?
HUBRIS!!!
It is most difficult for an educated being to admit that there are things above and beyond self, until maturity and the experience that only comes with time tempers that education. Great researchers make their greatest discoveries decades after their educational period and well into middle life.The combonation of education and Innate awareness compleates the process of discovery and greatness.
It is so easy to make “reccommendations” thinking we know something more than the body, the innate intelligence and the Creator. Yet so difficult to humbly do a simple adjustment and let the body do it’s wonder. That is the difficult paradox that I am dealing with as I have always been one to reccommend “stuff” for conditions and am now trying to let go. It is especially difficult when this is less lucrative and at a typically slow time of my practice.
I love the feeling of being in control, knowing what’s going on at all times, and telling others what is going on. However, I am in a profession where none of those things are up to me. Being in chiropractic has taught me there is something greater at work that is different than the way that I would do it. Even knowing that there is a Creator, and an ii that is superior and always working for the best of the “created”, I still find a tension there, that does not want to submit. I think that’s why it is so easy to “MIX”. Telling someone exactly what to do, what to expect, and what to take for their problem is a lot more satisfying than telling them to leave it to INNATE. But I know that the wisdom from the inside will do the best for the person regardless of what is done. Doing the best I can and combining it with knowing that there is an inner wisdom working for the best of the practice member is a winning combination.
Do you think OI is natural or socially infused? BJ used to write of the natural man, the primitive, not cursed by progress, “uneducated” by today’s standard. How he was at one with his world and lived a harmonious life with nature and his fellows.
It does not hurt my feelings that there is something much greater than me, in fact I find it inspiring and uplifting. Plus as Claude says, it takes a lot of responsibility off me. I do my little part and let the laws take over.
The answer my friend is in the “wind”. 🙂
I read a book once given to me by Dr. Thom Gelardi in 1994: “Mutant Message”, Marlo Morgan, published by:
M M CO. PO BOX 100, Lees Summit, MO 64063.
It is the true story of Marlo Morgan, D.C., WHO walked with an ancient tribe of aborigines in the hot desert of the outback of Australia for several months. A native of Chicago, she learned the wonderful secrets and wisdom of their culture. Things we all need to learn in our modern society: to get back in touch with nature, to trust and have faith in our INNER knowledge and guidance. These aborigines know they belong. They do NOT read, never heard of any scriptures and they “know” God and surrender to HIM. They converse with the Christ and relate to the desert of the outback as “mother” earth cooperating with its laws daily. They live ADIO.
The urban elite called them uncivilized, backward and primitive peoples… since they choose to live in the desert of the outback. So-called civilization THINKS itself better, smarter and more evolved (pride of the educated)… thus INTERFERING with the ONENESS of ALL, causing DIS-EASE within society. This way of THINKING literally splits the world into them and us, thereby promoting an uncooperative society based on dualistic meanings.
“We have met the enemy and it is us”.
Whoops Claude. Somebody (what’s the word these days “punked” you?) Anyway, I hope it wasn’t Thom Gelardi who perpetrated this hoax on you. Check it out on Google (Marlo Morgan australia), no mention of DC, thankfully. The best that can be said of it is that its a fictional work! The worst that it is a hoax that has come from the New Age movement, reminds me of that dastardly 100th Monkey hoax that continues to be spread among chiropractors.
Oooops! Joseph, I stand corrected! I checked it out on google and found the comments about the book that it is filled with fallacies. So, I will not use this book as a back up for my post. Please disregard it.
I’m still wondering about Steve’s question regarding whether OI is natural or socially infused.
And “WONDERING” is a word connoting at least 3 things:
1- Standing in disbelief
2- Standing in the question itself
3- Standing in awe before something
Let us try to have all 3 “standings” remain open INSIDE ourselves. It seems a very good way to grow philosophically, as long as the disbelief moves beyond mere skepticism or negativity.
Philosophy is at its best when an idea proceeds by the “questio” (Latin, “to seek”). YOUR English word “quest” comes from that same understanding. You asked the question “What do you think” and Steve asked his question too, which opens up wonder and encourages philosophical curiosity, refining the question itself instead of just looking for the perfect answer.
Of course, the pride of the ego is ALWAYS to affirm itself as the expense of denying the innate truth, otherwise it would have no need to exist. Ego is based of aggrandizing and inflating educated. What is needed is humility and patience with what is the natural in us and the “principle greater than us” in us.
Once again, thank you for the correction and bringing me back on track. That’s why I hang out with you so much. You are a good GPS always steering me in the right direction. I KNOW I can rely on YOU! 🙂
Steve, I think the first thing we need to establish is that everything outside-in is not bad, nor is educated always necessarily in conflict with innate intelligence.
Progress and the use of the educated has given mankind some great advances. I find it interesting that BJ speaks of God, talks about Adam and Eve (although usually as the subject of humor) and then ignores other historical records (the fact that the first man born murdered the second man born) and that nature has rarely existed in harmony with man and still does not, even in primitive societies.
The second problem with BJ philosophy goes back to the issue of cellular, tissue and organ intelligence which he apparently did not accept. The educated brain is an organ, which can function in a state of DIS-EASE (BJ acknowledges this) but it is also limited by Lof M. which can be genetic, traumatic or caused by the Fall (no pun intended). If that is the case then we can never expect the ed. Brain to function 100% any more than we can expect any other organ to in the presence of LofM. We can only make sure that all the organs are working as well as they possibly can. I don’t think we can separate man into natural/innate/good and unnatural/educated/bad. While some primitive activities are good and should be adopted, there are probably just as many that should be avoided at all costs and would be abhorrent to the ii (if ii abhorred). Man never existed solely as an innate being so the ed. Brain with all its problems is with every human being for a lifetime (at least) and some of those problems need the use of the educated brain to be resolved. The uniqueness of chiropractic is that we chiropractors subscribe to the Harry Callahan school of philosophy; “a man’s gotta know his limitations” (Magnum Force 1973)
Thank U Joe,
It also allow mwn to run out of responsibility to theirown life (health if u may).
Wait a minute Joe,
First, nature has always existed in harmony with man as man is a creation of nature, made of and subject to the same laws. It is man that has not maintained harmony through ignorance or arrogance. Secondly, your statement, “If that is the case then we can {never} expect the ed. Brain to function 100% any more than we can expect any other organ to in the presence of LoM”. Without subluxation, injury or miseducation the ei should be 100% therefore the matter(brain) should work at full capacity and according to it”s design. In other words there should be some times when ed. i is accurate. BJ spoke/wrote often about the subluxation interfering with innate to educated transmission, leaving the assumption that at times there was full communication. Although he may not have evolved the philosophy yet to include cellular intelligence he spoke of tissue insanity in any tissue not only the brain. Insanity being the disconnect / lack of harmony / dis-ease at the cellular level. We have touched on this before when discussing “thought flashes”. (Please correct me if I am wrong.) New age OSC says no to innate thought flashes as this is not the duty of ii, I believe your statement was ( in BJ’s case) his ed.i. did a superior job. Traditional philosophy says thought flashes are the product of direct communication between innate and educated. To which do you ascribe?
Third, I’m glad we finally agree that not all OIBU is bad.
And finally, can man ever know his limitations if does not know his full potential?
“First, nature has always existed in harmony with man as man is a creation of nature, made of and subject to the same laws.” Steve, so you’ve been there since the beginning of creation! If you ever come face to face with a lion in nature don’t try to give him the harmony lecture. Is survival of the fittest a natural law? If so how do you classify that as “harmony”? I’ll address the other points shortly.
“Without subluxation, injury or miseducation the ei should be 100% therefore the matter(brain) should work at full capacity and according to it”s design. ” and if wishes were horses beggars would ride. When there is a vs how does the ei discern what is or is not miseducation? So every decision based on miseducation was by a subluxated person or was it based on miseducation received when they were subluxated. How do you classify genetic damage (injury?) and can that cause miseducation and what happens to that miseducation? Does it disappear if adjusted. Is there such a thing as permanent brain damage and how does that affect the educated brain.? I would suggest that no one has a perfect educated, but it may make good decisions sometimes, in spite of that. Your (BJs) position brings up a lot of philosophical, scientific, physiological and theological questions. If correcting vs creates perfect educated expression why doesn’t the pancreas express perfect function when the vs has been corrected? Why doyou not attribute LofM to the ed br? More commentsand questions to come.
By the way Steve, I personally find the term “New Age OSC” to be offensive. In fact, in my opinion BJ philosophy is more new age than OSC. BJ was influenced by his travels to India and other eastern counties and his new ageyness (which is really Hinduism)began to surface after that and after Mabel’s death (who was a Methodist.
OK Joe, one at a time. I understand no one is flawless, but your statement never 100% I think is misleading. When I balance my checkbook and it actually balances my ed.i worked perfectly. It did exactly what it was designed to do. You keep saying with a subluxation, what about without, my point was like OIBU can be good so can a educated intelligence work properly. Just as sometimes the pancreas secretes the perfect amount at the perfect time. Even with LoM ii. adapts and corrects toward perfection and sometimes, I believe achieves it.
As for a lot of philosophical, scientific and physiological questions, that’s why I read and respond to this blog, I’m still learning. If at any time I over burden or truly irritate you please feel free to ask me to leave, I will. As for the theological aspects those are not chiropractic nor my concern, but it does seem you have quite an investment in that category. My chiropractic starts with the major premiss and works from there.
For New Age OSC, I apologize, I meant no offense , I was just trying to distinguish the traditional from the… “modern”. I do however think OSC is an evolution from the traditional philosophy I grew up with and was taught in school. I suppose there are some negative connotations with “new age” especially with Christians. My karate sensei was very upset when he saw a cross with crystals being sold as if the two were antagonistic, and to him they were. Dr. Matt McCoy stated “…we are the third and forth generation of chiropractors…”, obviously there are going to be refinements and additions to our philosophy. I’ll not use the term again for fear of misleading.
C’mon Joe, I’m not that old, well not most days. Yes, lion eating man is harmony of nature. Nobody said harmony meant winning everything all the time. As I said ignorance and arrogance. Man when ignorant fails to avoid the lion. Just as man learned to seek shelter from the cold and learned to drink fresh as apposed to sea water, he learned to avoid the beasts. I did not say man conquered all aspects of nature but primitive man got along with nature or we wouldn’t be here today. Animals are in harmony with nature (unless affected by man) and they eat each other all the time. Survival of the fittest does indeed seem to be natural law but sometimes intelligence wins over brute strength.
Most of the time I believe that the “outside in” stuff is mainly “fascination value” activity for the Dr, kind of like surfing the web . . . something to focus the attention; probably safer to keep it as a hobby.
It is important in a strongly PI practice (as ours is) to recognize problems that need other professionals’ services, and, even though there are times I “wish” I could be “the one” that “gets them better”, my job IS to know when to bring in outside help as I stay happy to check them, adjust them and make sure they understand why it is important to stay with their program.
Is that humbleness? I don’t know; but it certainly is a less stressful way of practice. It does require developing examination skills not routinely used by a lot of Chiropractors I’ve known over the years, mostly because most I know understood the wisdom of Jim Parker’s “Doctor of Chronics”, and that can provide a lot of “fascination value”.
The more I learn, the more I know about innate and my body’s ability to heal itself, so therefore, knowledge should only encourage innate and there should be no conflict. I find it to be more of a problem when people refuse to look outside (themselves and their paradigms) in order to find what is true within. The idea that OI is a negative relationship makes no sense. Our bodies and minds rely on our environment to grow and thrive. It is merely a choice of what you choose to bring in from outside of yourself.